↓ Skip to main content

Potentially modifiable factors contributing to outcome from acute respiratory distress syndrome: the LUNG SAFE study

Overview of attention for article published in Intensive Care Medicine, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
258 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
367 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
Potentially modifiable factors contributing to outcome from acute respiratory distress syndrome: the LUNG SAFE study
Published in
Intensive Care Medicine, October 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00134-016-4571-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

John G. Laffey, Giacomo Bellani, Tài Pham, Eddy Fan, Fabiana Madotto, Ednan K. Bajwa, Laurent Brochard, Kevin Clarkson, Andres Esteban, Luciano Gattinoni, Frank van Haren, Leo M. Heunks, Kiyoyasu Kurahashi, Jon Henrik Laake, Anders Larsson, Daniel F. McAuley, Lia McNamee, Nicolas Nin, Haibo Qiu, Marco Ranieri, Gordon D. Rubenfeld, B. Taylor Thompson, Hermann Wrigge, Arthur S. Slutsky, Antonio Pesenti

Abstract

To improve the outcome of the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), one needs to identify potentially modifiable factors associated with mortality. The large observational study to understand the global impact of severe acute respiratory failure (LUNG SAFE) was an international, multicenter, prospective cohort study of patients with severe respiratory failure, conducted in the winter of 2014 in a convenience sample of 459 ICUs from 50 countries across five continents. A pre-specified secondary aim was to examine the factors associated with outcome. Analyses were restricted to patients (93.1 %) fulfilling ARDS criteria on day 1-2 who received invasive mechanical ventilation. 2377 patients were included in the analysis. Potentially modifiable factors associated with increased hospital mortality in multivariable analyses include lower PEEP, higher peak inspiratory, plateau, and driving pressures, and increased respiratory rate. The impact of tidal volume on outcome was unclear. Having fewer ICU beds was also associated with higher hospital mortality. Non-modifiable factors associated with worsened outcome from ARDS included older age, active neoplasm, hematologic neoplasm, and chronic liver failure. Severity of illness indices including lower pH, lower PaO2/FiO2 ratio, and higher non-pulmonary SOFA score were associated with poorer outcome. Of the 578 (24.3 %) patients with a limitation of life-sustaining therapies or measures decision, 498 (86.0 %) died in hospital. Factors associated with increased likelihood of limitation of life-sustaining therapies or measures decision included older age, immunosuppression, neoplasia, lower pH and increased non-pulmonary SOFA scores. Higher PEEP, lower peak, plateau, and driving pressures, and lower respiratory rate are associated with improved survival from ARDS. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02010073.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 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 367 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 367 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 54 15%
Other 33 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 33 9%
Student > Postgraduate 26 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 26 7%
Other 96 26%
Unknown 99 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 216 59%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 4%
Engineering 8 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 1%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 <1%
Other 14 4%
Unknown 108 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 06 April 2022.
All research outputs
#2,646,294
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Intensive Care Medicine
#1,915
of 5,570 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,767
of 328,564 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Intensive Care Medicine
#33
of 118 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,570 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 328,564 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 118 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.