↓ Skip to main content

Changes in the severity and subtype of Guillain-Barré syndrome admitted to a specialist Neuromedical ICU over a 25 year period

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neurology, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 Mendeley
Title
Changes in the severity and subtype of Guillain-Barré syndrome admitted to a specialist Neuromedical ICU over a 25 year period
Published in
Journal of Neurology, January 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00415-016-8380-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

C. J. Taylor, N. P. Hirsch, D. M. Kullmann, Robin S. Howard

Abstract

We report a retrospective review of 110 patients with acute Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) admitted to a specialised intensive care unit (ICU) in a tertiary referral centre over a 25 year period, the start of which coincided with the widespread introduction of plasma exchange (PE) and intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG). The results were analysed by comparing 52 patients admitted in the first decade (1991-2000; Group 1) with 58 patients admitted between 2001-2014 (Group 2). Patients in both groups were comparable with respect to age and sex, and had a similar incidence and range of ICU complications. They received a comparable range of immunomodulatory treatments including IVIG and PE. However, the delay from presentation to referral to the tertiary ICU was longer in patients in Group 2. They also required mechanical ventilation for a longer duration, and had longer ICU and hospital stays. In Group 2, there was a higher incidence of axonal neuropathy (51%, compared to 24% in Group 1). Despite the longer delay to referral, the prevalence of axonal neuropathy and the duration of ventilation, overall mortality showed a downward trend (Group 1: 13.5%; Group 2: 5.2%). There was no late mortality in either group after step-down to neuro-rehabilitation or following discharge home or to the referring hospital. The rehabilitation outcomes were similar. This data show a shift in the pattern of referral to a tertiary referral ICU between the first and second decades following the wider availability of IVIG and PE for the treatment of GBS. The possible causes and implications of these findings are discussed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 60 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 13%
Student > Bachelor 7 12%
Student > Master 6 10%
Professor 5 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 19 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 27%
Neuroscience 8 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 20 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 02 February 2017.
All research outputs
#15,437,553
of 22,947,506 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neurology
#3,272
of 4,511 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#255,962
of 418,908 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neurology
#33
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,947,506 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,511 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 418,908 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.