| Title |
Combined use of the multidimensional prognostic index (MPI) and procalcitonin serum levels in predicting 1-month mortality risk in older patients hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP): a prospective study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Aging Clinical and Experimental Research, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40520-017-0759-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alberto Pilotto, Simone Dini, Julia Daragjati, Manuela Miolo, Monica Maria Mion, Andrea Fontana, Mario Lo Storto, Martina Zaninotto, Alberto Cella, Paolo Carraro, Filomena Addante, Massimiliano Copetti, Mario Plebani |
| Abstract |
Several scores and biomarkers, i.e., procalcitonin (PCT), were proposed to stratify the mortality risk in community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). Evaluating prognostic accuracy of PCT and Multidimensional Prognostic Index (MPI) for 1-month mortality risk in older patients with CAP. At hospital admission and at discharge, patients were evaluated by a Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment to calculate MPI. Serum PCT was measured at admission and 1, 3, and 5 days after hospital admission. 49 patients were enrolled. The overall 1-month mortality was 44.5 for 100-persons year. Mortality rates were higher with the increasing of MPI. In survived patients, MPI at discharge showed higher predictive accuracy than MPI at admission. Adding PCT levels to admission MPI prognostic accuracy for 1-month mortality significantly increased. In older patients with CAP, MPI significantly predicted 1 month mortality. PCT levels significantly improved the accuracy of MPI at admission in predicting 1-month mortality. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Peru | 1 | 25% |
| Spain | 1 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 27 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 3 | 11% |
| Researcher | 3 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 14 | 52% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 26% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 7% |
| Engineering | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 14 | 52% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 20 April 2017.
All research outputs
#14,477,297
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Aging Clinical and Experimental Research
#980
of 1,867 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#157,721
of 323,974 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Aging Clinical and Experimental Research
#14
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,867 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 323,974 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 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 50% of its contemporaries.