↓ Skip to main content

Pooled analysis of higher versus lower blood pressure targets for vasopressor therapy septic and vasodilatory shock

Overview of attention for article published in Intensive Care Medicine, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
2 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
78 X users
facebook
7 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
99 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
149 Mendeley
Title
Pooled analysis of higher versus lower blood pressure targets for vasopressor therapy septic and vasodilatory shock
Published in
Intensive Care Medicine, December 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00134-017-5016-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

François Lamontagne, Andrew G. Day, Maureen O. Meade, Deborah J. Cook, Gordon H. Guyatt, Mathieu Hylands, Peter Radermacher, Jean-Marie Chrétien, Nicolas Beaudoin, Paul Hébert, Frédérick D’Aragon, Ferhat Meziani, Pierre Asfar

Abstract

Guidelines for shock recommend mean arterial pressure (MAP) targets for vasopressor therapy of at least 65 mmHg and, until recently, suggested that patients with underlying chronic hypertension and atherosclerosis may benefit from higher targets. We conducted an individual patient-data meta-analysis of recent trials to determine if patient variables modify the effect of different MAP targets. We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for randomized controlled trials of higher versus lower blood pressure targets for vasopressor therapy in adult patients in shock (until November 2017). After obtaining individual patient data from both eligible trials, we used a modified version of the Cochrane Collaboration's instrument to assess the risk of bias of included trials. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. Included trials enrolled 894 patients. Controlling for trial and site, the OR for 28-day mortality for the higher versus lower MAP targets was 1.15 (95% CI 0.87-1.52). Treatment effect varied by duration of vasopressors before randomization (interaction p = 0.017), but not by chronic hypertension, congestive heart failure or age. Risk of death increased in higher MAP groups among patients on vasopressors > 6 h before randomization (OR 3.00, 95% CI 1.33-6.74). Targeting higher blood pressure targets may increase mortality in patients who have been treated with vasopressors for more than 6 h. Lower blood pressure targets were not associated with patient-important adverse events in any subgroup, including chronically hypertensive patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 78 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 149 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 149 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 22 15%
Researcher 19 13%
Student > Postgraduate 12 8%
Student > Master 11 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 6%
Other 31 21%
Unknown 45 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 74 50%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 7%
Social Sciences 4 3%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 3 2%
Engineering 2 1%
Other 6 4%
Unknown 50 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 69. 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 October 2023.
All research outputs
#625,616
of 25,604,262 outputs
Outputs from Intensive Care Medicine
#574
of 5,444 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,173
of 448,479 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Intensive Care Medicine
#22
of 100 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,604,262 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,444 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 448,479 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 100 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.