↓ Skip to main content

Strategies to reduce curative antibiotic therapy in intensive care units (adult and paediatric)

Overview of attention for article published in Intensive Care Medicine, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
59 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
124 Mendeley
Title
Strategies to reduce curative antibiotic therapy in intensive care units (adult and paediatric)
Published in
Intensive Care Medicine, June 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00134-015-3853-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cédric Bretonnière, Marc Leone, Christophe Milési, Bernard Allaouchiche, Laurence Armand-Lefevre, Olivier Baldesi, Lila Bouadma, Dominique Decré, Samy Figueiredo, Rémy Gauzit, Benoît Guery, Nicolas Joram, Boris Jung, Sigismond Lasocki, Alain Lepape, Fabrice Lesage, Olivier Pajot, François Philippart, Bertrand Souweine, Pierre Tattevin, Jean-François Timsit, Renaud Vialet, Jean Ralph Zahar, Benoît Misset, Jean-Pierre Bedos

Abstract

Emerging resistance to antibiotics shows no signs of decline. At the same time, few new antibacterials are being discovered. There is a worldwide recognition regarding the danger of this situation. The urgency of the situation and the conviction that practices should change led the Société de Réanimation de Langue Française (SRLF) and the Société Française d'Anesthésie et de Réanimation (SFAR) to set up a panel of experts from various disciplines. These experts met for the first time at the end of 2012 and have since met regularly to issue the following 67 recommendations, according to the rigorous GRADE methodology. Five fields were explored: i) the link between the resistance of bacteria and the use of antibiotics in intensive care; ii) which microbiological data and how to use them to reduce antibiotic consumption; iii) how should antibiotic therapy be chosen to limit consumption of antibiotics; iv) how can antibiotic administration be optimized; v) review and duration of antibiotic treatments. In each institution, the appropriation of these recommendations should arouse multidisciplinary discussions resulting in better knowledge of local epidemiology, rate of antibiotic use, and finally protocols for improving the stewardship of antibiotics. These efforts should contribute to limit the emergence of resistant bacteria.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 124 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Unknown 122 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 19 15%
Student > Master 19 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 10%
Other 10 8%
Student > Postgraduate 8 6%
Other 28 23%
Unknown 27 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 54 44%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 2%
Other 14 11%
Unknown 40 32%
Attention Score in Context

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 21 February 2020.
All research outputs
#6,490,103
of 25,522,520 outputs
Outputs from Intensive Care Medicine
#2,795
of 5,434 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,409
of 281,346 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Intensive Care Medicine
#21
of 91 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,522,520 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 5,434 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.6. 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 281,346 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 91 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.