↓ Skip to main content

Renal angina: an emerging paradigm to identify children at risk for acute kidney injury

Overview of attention for article published in Pediatric Nephrology, October 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
103 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
97 Mendeley
Title
Renal angina: an emerging paradigm to identify children at risk for acute kidney injury
Published in
Pediatric Nephrology, October 2011
DOI 10.1007/s00467-011-2024-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rajit K. Basu, Lakhmir S. Chawla, Derek S. Wheeler, Stuart L. Goldstein

Abstract

Acute kidney injury (AKI) leads to high rates of morbidity and independently increases mortality risk. Therapy for AKI is likely limited by the inability to reliably diagnose AKI in its early stages, and, importantly, small changes in serum creatinine may be associated with poor outcomes and severe AKI. Whereas AKI biomarker research seeks to identify more sensitive and timely indices of kidney dysfunction, AKI lacks physical signs and symptoms to trigger biomarker assessment in at-risk patients, limiting biomarker efficacy. Accurate models of AKI prediction are unavailable. Severity of illness (SOI) scoring systems and organ dysfunction scores (OD), which stratify patients by prediction of mortality risk, are AKI reactive, not predictive. Kidney-specific severity scores do not account for AKI progression, and stratification models of AKI severity are not predictive of AKI. Thus, there is a need for a kidney scoring system that can help predict the development of AKI. This review highlights the concept of renal angina, a combination of patient risk factors and subtle AKI, as a methodology to predict AKI progression. Fulfillment of renal angina criteria will improve the efficiency of AKI prediction by biomarkers, in turn expediting early therapy and assisting in creation of AKI-predictive scoring systems.

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 97 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 2 2%
United States 1 1%
South Africa 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 92 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 14%
Student > Postgraduate 13 13%
Student > Master 12 12%
Other 7 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 6%
Other 23 24%
Unknown 22 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 55 57%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Other 6 6%
Unknown 27 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 14 July 2012.
All research outputs
#15,247,248
of 22,671,366 outputs
Outputs from Pediatric Nephrology
#2,701
of 3,519 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#95,427
of 139,472 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pediatric Nephrology
#18
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,671,366 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,519 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 139,472 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.