↓ Skip to main content

Acute kidney injury: from clinical to molecular diagnosis

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
11 news outlets
twitter
37 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
55 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
88 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Acute kidney injury: from clinical to molecular diagnosis
Published in
Critical Care, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13054-016-1373-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Claudio Ronco

Abstract

The RIFLE classification was introduced in 2004 to describe the presence of acute kidney injury (AKI) and to define its clinical stage, based upon the serum creatinine level and urine output. The same criteria, although slightly modified, are used in the other scoring systems AKIN and KDIGO. Mortality and morbidity remain high in AKI, suggesting that current diagnostic methods are suboptimal, poorly accurate, and often timely inadequate in detecting the presence of early kidney injury. Conversely, a growing body of evidence indicates that new AKI biomarkers can be used to both rule out AKI and to assess high-risk conditions or the presence of subclinical forms. Neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin or cell cycle arrest biomarkers seem to be sensitive and specific enough to be used in conjunction with existing markers of AKI for better classifying renal injury as well as dysfunction. Improvements in diagnosis, risk identification, stratification, prognosis, and therapeutic monitoring may improve prevention and protection from organ damage and help to identify patients at risk, allowing individualized therapy. In this view, we may say that AKI diagnosis has finally moved from clinical to molecular level with potential benefits for the patients because similar progress has been shown in other disciplines.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 37 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 88 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 16%
Student > Postgraduate 12 14%
Other 9 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 9%
Student > Bachelor 7 8%
Other 24 27%
Unknown 14 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 57 65%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 7%
Psychology 3 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Engineering 2 2%
Other 3 3%
Unknown 15 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 107. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 May 2021.
All research outputs
#298,544
of 21,453,375 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#175
of 5,823 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,383
of 275,367 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#2
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,453,375 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,823 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 275,367 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.