↓ Skip to main content

Antithrombin III for critically ill patients: a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Intensive Care Medicine, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
patent
1 patent
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
81 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
95 Mendeley
Title
Antithrombin III for critically ill patients: a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis
Published in
Intensive Care Medicine, February 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00134-016-4225-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mikkel Allingstrup, Jørn Wetterslev, Frederikke B. Ravn, Ann Merete Møller, Arash Afshari

Abstract

Antithrombin III (AT III) is an anticoagulant with anti-inflammatory properties. We assessed the benefits and harms of AT III in critically ill patients. We searched from inception to 27 August 2015 in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CAB, BIOSIS and CINAHL. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) irrespective of publication status, date of publication, blinding status, outcomes published or language. We included 30 RCTs with a total of 3933 participants. The majority of included trials were at high risk of bias. Combining all trials, regardless of bias, showed no statistically significant effect of AT III on mortality (RR 0.95, 95 % CI 0.88-1.03, I (2) = 0 %, fixed-effect model, 29 trials, 3882 participants). Among those with severe sepsis and disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC), AT III showed no impact on mortality (RR 0.95, 95 % Cl 0.88-1.03, I (2) = 0 %, fixed-effect model, 12 trials, 2858 participants). We carried out multiple subgroup and sensitivity analyses to assess the benefits and harms of AT III and to examine the impact of risk of bias. AT III significantly increased bleeding events (RR 1.58, 95 % CI 1.35-1.84, I (2) = 0 %, fixed-effect model, 11 trials, 3019 participants). However, for all other outcome measures and analyses, the results did not reach statistical significance. There is insufficient evidence to support AT III substitution in any category of critically ill participants including those with sepsis and DIC. AT III did not show an impact on mortality, but increased the risk of bleeding.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Czechia 1 1%
Italy 1 1%
Unknown 92 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 17%
Other 9 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 8%
Student > Postgraduate 8 8%
Student > Master 7 7%
Other 24 25%
Unknown 23 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 52 55%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 3%
Arts and Humanities 1 1%
Other 5 5%
Unknown 27 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 06 March 2021.
All research outputs
#4,756,250
of 25,998,826 outputs
Outputs from Intensive Care Medicine
#2,467
of 5,560 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,922
of 415,076 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Intensive Care Medicine
#24
of 97 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,998,826 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,560 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 415,076 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 97 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.