↓ Skip to main content

Simvastatin for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: long-term outcomes and cost-effectiveness from a randomised controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
64 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
Simvastatin for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: long-term outcomes and cost-effectiveness from a randomised controlled trial
Published in
Critical Care, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13054-017-1695-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

A. Agus, C. Hulme, R. M. Verghis, C. McDowell, C. Jackson, C. M. O’Kane, J. G. Laffey, D. F. McAuley

Abstract

Simvastatin therapy for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) has been shown to be safe and associated with minimal adverse effects, but it does not improve clinical outcomes. The aim of this research was to report on mortality and cost-effectiveness of simvastatin in patients with ARDS at 12 months. This was a cost-utility analysis alongside a multicentre, double-blind, randomised controlled trial carried out in the UK and Ireland. Five hundred and forty intubated and mechanically ventilated patients with ARDS were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive once-daily simvastatin (at a dose of 80 mg) or identical placebo tablets enterally for up to 28 days. Mortality was lower in the simvastatin group (31.8%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 26.1-37.5) compared to the placebo group (37.3%, 95% CI 31.6-43.0) at 12 months, although this was not significant. Simvastatin was associated with statistically significant quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gain (incremental QALYs 0.064, 95% CI 0.002-0.127) compared to placebo. Simvastatin was also less costly (incremental total costs -£3601, 95% CI -8061 to 859). At a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000 per QALY, the probability of simvastatin being cost-effective was 99%. Sensitivity analyses indicated that the results were robust to changes in methodological assumptions with the probability of cost-effectiveness never dropping below 90%. Simvastatin was found to be cost-effective for the treatment of ARDS, being associated with both a significant QALY gain and a cost saving. There was no significant reduction in mortality at 12 months, TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN, 88244364. Registered 26 November 2010.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 2%
Unknown 63 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 17%
Student > Bachelor 9 14%
Other 7 11%
Professor 5 8%
Student > Master 5 8%
Other 8 13%
Unknown 19 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 8 13%
Unknown 21 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 25 April 2019.
All research outputs
#5,142,991
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#3,344
of 6,555 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#83,336
of 327,133 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#58
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,555 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 327,133 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 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.