↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Prognostic scores and biomarkers for pediatric community-acquired pneumonia: how far have we come?

Overview of attention for article published in Pediatric Health, Medicine and Therapeutics, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 Mendeley
Title
Prognostic scores and biomarkers for pediatric community-acquired pneumonia: how far have we come?
Published in
Pediatric Health, Medicine and Therapeutics, February 2017
DOI 10.2147/phmt.s126001
Pubmed ID
Authors

Samuel N Uwaezuoke, Adaeze C Ayuk

Abstract

This article aimed to review the current prognostic and diagnostic tools used for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) and highlight those potentially applicable in children with CAP. Several scoring systems have been developed to predict CAP mortality risk and serve as guides for admission into the intensive care unit. Over the years, clinicians have adopted these tools for improving site-of-care decisions because of high mortality rates in the extremes of age. The major scoring systems designed for geriatric patients include the Pneumonia Severity Index and the confusion, uremia, respiratory rate, blood pressure, age >65 years (CURB-65) rule, as well as better predictors of intensive care unit admission, such as the systolic blood pressure, multilobar chest radiography involvement, albumin level, respiratory rate, tachycardia, confusion, oxygenation and arterial pH (SMART-COP) score, the Infectious Diseases Society of America/American Thoracic Society guidelines, the criteria developed by España et al as well as the systolic blood pressure, oxygenation, age and respiratory rate (SOAR) criteria. Only the modified predisposition, insult, response and organ dysfunction (PIRO) score has so far been applied to children with CAP. Because none of the tools is without its limitations, there has been a paradigm shift to incorporate biomarkers because they are reliable diagnostic tools and good predictors of disease severity and outcome, irrespective of age group. Despite the initial preponderance of reports on their utility in geriatric CAP, much progress has now been made in demonstrating their usefulness in pediatric CAP.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 83 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 19 23%
Student > Master 8 10%
Lecturer 6 7%
Other 5 6%
Student > Postgraduate 5 6%
Other 15 18%
Unknown 25 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 39 47%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 8%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 4%
Unspecified 1 1%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 1%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 30 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 23 February 2017.
All research outputs
#16,725,651
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Pediatric Health, Medicine and Therapeutics
#72
of 172 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#256,839
of 424,972 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pediatric Health, Medicine and Therapeutics
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 172 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 424,972 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.