| Title |
The increasing need for biomarkers in intensive care unit-acquired weakness - are microRNAs the solution?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Care, December 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13054-015-0901-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sebastian T Lugg, Phillip A Howells, David R Thickett |
| Abstract |
There is an increasing focus on intensive care unit-acquired weakness, its underlying mechanisms and therapeutic options. In this article we offer a commentary on the paper by Bloch and colleagues entitled 'MiR-181a: a potential biomarker of acute muscle wasting following cardiac surgery'. There is a need for biomarkers for intensive care unit-acquired weakness, not only in clinical practice but also in order to streamline future therapeutic trials. MicroRNAs are attractive biomarkers, and may have an important role in this disease. We highlight the significance of the authors' finding of miR-181a, a novel plasma biomarker for the development of acute muscle wasting in post-operative cardiac surgery patients and discuss future research that is needed in this field following on from the study findings. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Puerto Rico | 2 | 50% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 75% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 24 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 25% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 17% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 13% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 4 | 17% |
| Unknown | 2 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 63% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 13% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Engineering | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 3 | 13% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 2015.
All research outputs
#15,168,167
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#4,986
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#200,198
of 395,411 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#422
of 466 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,554 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 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 395,411 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 466 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.