| Title |
CURB-65 Score is Equal to NEWS for Identifying Mortality Risk of Pneumonia Patients: An Observational Study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Lung, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00408-018-0105-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mikkel Brabrand, Daniel Pilsgaard Henriksen |
| Abstract |
The CURB-65 score is widely implemented as a prediction tool for identifying patients with community-acquired pneumonia (cap) at increased risk of 30-day mortality. However, since most ingredients of CURB-65 are used as general prediction tools, it is likely that other prediction tools, e.g. the British National Early Warning Score (NEWS), could be as good as CURB-65 at predicting the fate of CAP patients. To determine whether NEWS is better than CURB-65 at predicting 30-day mortality of CAP patients. This was a single-centre, 6-month observational study using patients' vital signs and demographic information registered upon admission, survival status extracted from the Danish Civil Registration System after discharge and blood test results extracted from a local database. The study was conducted in the medical admission unit (MAU) at the Hospital of South West Jutland, a regional teaching hospital in Denmark. The participants consisted of 570 CAP patients, 291 female and 279 male, median age 74 (20-102) years. The CURB-65 score had a discriminatory power of 0.728 (0.667-0.789) and NEWS 0.710 (0.645-0.775), both with good calibration and no statistical significant difference. CURB-65 was not demonstrated to be significantly statistically better than NEWS at identifying CAP patients at risk of 30-day mortality. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Denmark | 2 | 29% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 29% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 2 | 29% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 71% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 14% |
| Scientists | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 52 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 5 | 10% |
| Unknown | 19 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 35% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 6% |
| Psychology | 2 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 20 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 31 March 2018.
All research outputs
#5,919,174
of 23,028,364 outputs
Outputs from Lung
#177
of 893 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#105,308
of 333,763 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Lung
#1
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,028,364 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 893 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 333,763 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 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.