↓ Skip to main content
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 (89th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
6 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
120 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.
Article details
Title
Intraoperative dexamethasone does not increase the risk of postoperative wound infection: a propensity score-matched post hoc analysis of the ENIGMA-II trial (EnDEX)
Published in
BJA: The British Journal of Anaesthesia, February 2017
DOI 10.1093/bja/aew446
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

In a post hoc analysis of the ENIGMA-II trial, we sought to determine whether intraoperative dexamethasone was associated with adverse safety outcomes. Inverse probability weighting with estimated propensity scores was used to determine the association of dexamethasone administration with postoperative infection, quality of recovery, and adverse safety outcomes for 5499 of the 7112 non-cardiac surgery subjects enrolled in ENIGMA-II. Dexamethasone was administered to 2178 (40%) of the 5499 subjects included in this analysis and was not associated with wound infection [189 (8.7%) vs 275 (8.3%); propensity score-adjusted relative risk (RR) 1.10; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89-1.34; P=0.38], severe postoperative nausea and vomiting on day 1 [242 (7.3%) vs 189 (8.7%); propensity score-adjusted RR 1.06; 95% CI 0.86-1.30; P=0.59], quality of recovery score [median 14, interquartile range (IQR) 12-15, vs median 14, IQR 12-16, P=0.10), length of stay in the postanaesthesia care unit [propensity score-adjusted median (IQR) 2.0 (1.3, 2.9) vs 1.9 (1.3, 3.1), P=0.60], or the primary outcome of the main trial. Dexamethasone administration was associated with a decrease in fever on days 1-3 [182 (8.4%) vs 488 (14.7%); RR 0.61; 95% CI 0.5-0.74; P<0.001] and shorter lengths of stay in hospital [propensity score-adjusted median (IQR) 5.0 (2.9, 8.2) vs 5.3 (3.1, 9.1), P<0.001]. Neither diabetes mellitus nor surgical wound contamination status altered these outcomes. Dexamethasone administration to high-risk non-cardiac surgical patients did not increase the risk of postoperative wound infection or other adverse events up to day 30, and appears to be safe in patients either with or without diabetes mellitus. NCT00430989.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 120 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 120 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 12 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 8%
Student > Bachelor 10 8%
Student > Master 9 8%
Student > Postgraduate 7 6%
Other 20 17%
Unknown 52 43%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 12%
Unspecified 2 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Social Sciences 2 2%
Other 5 4%
Unknown 62 52%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 May 2021.
All research outputs
#3,269,672
of 34,526,284 outputs
Outputs from BJA: The British Journal of Anaesthesia
#1,478
of 8,913 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,394
of 471,417 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BJA: The British Journal of Anaesthesia
#16
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,526,284 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,913 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 471,417 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.