↓ Skip to main content

UTILIZAÇÃO DE ESCORE E DOSAGEM DE LACTATO NO LÍQUOR PARA DIAGNÓSTICO DIFERENCIAL ENTRE MENINGITE BACTERIANA E MENINGITE ASSÉPTICA

Overview of attention for article published in Revista Paulista de Pediatria, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
13 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
UTILIZAÇÃO DE ESCORE E DOSAGEM DE LACTATO NO LÍQUOR PARA DIAGNÓSTICO DIFERENCIAL ENTRE MENINGITE BACTERIANA E MENINGITE ASSÉPTICA
Published in
Revista Paulista de Pediatria, January 2017
DOI 10.1590/1984-0462/;2017;35;4;00010
Pubmed ID
Authors

Frederico Ribeiro Pires, Andréia Christine Bonotto Farias Franco, Alfredo Elias Gilio, Eduardo Juan Troster

Abstract

To evaluate Bacterial Meningitis Score (BMS) on its own and in association with Cerebrospinal Fluid (CSF) lactate dosage in order to distinguish bacterial from aseptic meningitis. Children diagnosed with meningitis at a tertiary hospital between January/2011 and December/2014 were selected. All data were obtained upon admission. BMS was applied and included: CSF Gram staining (2 points); CSF neutrophil count ≥1,000 cells/mm3 (1 point); CSF protein ≥80 mg/dL (1 point); peripheral blood neutrophil count ≥10,000 cells/mm3 (1 point) and seizures upon/before arrival (1 point). Cutoff value for CSF lactate was ≥30 mg/dL. Sensitivity, specificity and negative predictive value of several BMS cutoffs and BMS associated with high CSF lactate were evaluated for prediction of bacterial meningitis. Among 439 eligible patients, 94 did not have all data available to complete the score, and 345 patients were included: 7 in bacterial meningitis group and 338 in aseptic meningitis group. As predictive factors of bacterial meningitis, BMS ≥1 had 100% sensitivity (95%CI 47.3-100), 64.2% specificity (58.8-100) and 100% negative predictive value (97.5-100); BMS ≥2 or BMS ≥1 associated with high CSF lactate also showed 100% sensitivity (47.3-100); but 98.5% specificity (96.6-99.5) and 100% negative predictive value (98.3-100). 2 point BMS in association with CSF lactate dosage had the same sensitivity and negative predictive value, with increased specificity for diagnosis of bacterial meningitis when compared with 1-point BMS.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 13 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 2 15%
Student > Postgraduate 2 15%
Professor 2 15%
Unspecified 1 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 8%
Other 2 15%
Unknown 3 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 23%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 15%
Neuroscience 2 15%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 8%
Unspecified 1 8%
Other 1 8%
Unknown 3 23%
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 12 December 2017.
All research outputs
#20,663,600
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Revista Paulista de Pediatria
#274
of 511 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#320,228
of 421,709 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista Paulista de Pediatria
#11
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 511 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 421,709 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.