↓ Skip to main content

Using risk factors and markers to predict bacterial respiratory co-/superinfections in COVID-19 patients: is the antibiotic steward’s toolbox full or empty?

Overview of attention for article published in Acta Clinica Belgica, February 2023
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Readers on

mendeley
6 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
Using risk factors and markers to predict bacterial respiratory co-/superinfections in COVID-19 patients: is the antibiotic steward’s toolbox full or empty?
Published in
Acta Clinica Belgica, February 2023
DOI 10.1080/17843286.2023.2167328
Pubmed ID
Authors

Johan Van Laethem, Jan Pierreux, Stephanie CM Wuyts, Deborah De Geyter, Sabine D Allard, Nicolas Dauby

Abstract

Adequate diagnosis of bacterial respiratory tract co-/superinfection (bRTI) in coronavirus disease (COVID-19) patients is challenging, as there is insufficient knowledge about the role of risk factors and (para)clinical parameters in the identification of bacterial co-/superinfection in the COVID-19 setting. Empirical antibiotic therapy is mainly based on COVID-19 severity and expert opinion, rather than on scientific evidence generated since the start of the pandemic. We report the best available evidence regarding the predictive value of risk factors and (para)clinical markers in the diagnosis of bRTI in COVID-19 patients. A multidisciplinary team identified different potential risk factors and (para)clinical predictors of bRTI in COVID-19 and formulated one or two research questions per topic. After a thorough literature search, research gaps were identified, and suggestions concerning further research were formulated. The quality of this narrative review was ensured by following the Scale for the Assessment of Narrative Review Articles. Taking into account the scarcity of scientific evidence for markers and risk factors of bRTI in COVID-19 patients, to date, COVID-19 severity is the only parameter which can be associated with higher risk of developing bRTI. Evidence on the usefulness of risk factors and (para)clinical factors as predictors of bRTI in COVID-19 patients is scarce. Robust studies are needed to optimise antibiotic prescribing and stewardship activities in the context of COVID-19.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 6 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 6 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 1 17%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 17%
Researcher 1 17%
Student > Postgraduate 1 17%
Unknown 2 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 50%
Unspecified 1 17%
Unknown 2 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 February 2023.
All research outputs
#6,924,378
of 25,321,938 outputs
Outputs from Acta Clinica Belgica
#61
of 467 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#125,731
of 471,640 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Acta Clinica Belgica
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,321,938 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 467 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 471,640 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 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them