↓ Skip to main content

Probiotics in the Intensive Care Unit

Overview of attention for article published in Nutrition in Clinical Practice, April 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Readers on

mendeley
145 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
Probiotics in the Intensive Care Unit
Published in
Nutrition in Clinical Practice, April 2012
DOI 10.1177/0884533612440290
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Probiotics are living microorganisms that, when ingested in adequate amounts, provide benefits to the host. The benefits include either a shortened duration of infections or decreased susceptibility to pathogens. Proposed mechanisms of beneficial effects include improving gastrointestinal barrier function, modification of the gut flora by inducing host cell antimicrobial peptides and/or local release of probiotic antimicrobial factors, competition for epithelial adherence, and immunomodulation. With increasing intensive care unit (ICU) antibacterial resistance rates and fewer new antibiotics in the research pipeline, focus has been shifted to non-antibiotic approaches for the prevention and treatment of nosocomial infections. Probiotics offer promise to ICU patients for the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhea, Clostridium difficile infections, multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, and ventilator-associated pneumonia. Our current understanding of probiotics is confounded by inconsistency in probiotic strains studied, optimal dosages, study durations, and suboptimal sample sizes. Although probiotics are generally safe in the critically ill, adverse event monitoring must be rigorous in these vulnerable patients. Delineation of clinical differences of various effective probiotic strains, their mechanisms of action, and optimal dosing regimens will better establish the role of probiotics in various disorders. However, probiotic research will likely be hindered in the future given a recent ruling by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

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 2 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 145 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 %
Kazakhstan 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Greece 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 140 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 24 17%
Researcher 22 15%
Student > Postgraduate 12 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 8%
Student > Bachelor 9 6%
Other 29 20%
Unknown 38 26%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 51 35%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 4%
Other 17 12%
Unknown 42 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 11 July 2012.
All research outputs
#6,378,788
of 22,664,267 outputs
Outputs from Nutrition in Clinical Practice
#530
of 1,389 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,352
of 160,991 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutrition in Clinical Practice
#10
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,664,267 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,389 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 160,991 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.