↓ Skip to main content

ISPD Peritonitis Recommendations: 2016 Update on Prevention and Treatment

Overview of attention for article published in Peritoneal Dialysis International, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#6 of 1,694)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
159 X users
patent
5 patents
facebook
8 Facebook pages
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages
reddit
1 Redditor
guideline
2 clinical guideline sources

Readers on

mendeley
937 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
ISPD Peritonitis Recommendations: 2016 Update on Prevention and Treatment
Published in
Peritoneal Dialysis International, September 2016
DOI 10.3747/pdi.2016.00078
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Peritonitis is a common and serious complication of peritoneal dialysis (PD). Although less than 5% of peritonitis episodes result in death, peritonitis is the direct or major contributing cause of death in around 16% of PD patients (1-6). In addition, severe or prolonged peritonitis leads to structural and functional alterations of the peritoneal membrane, eventually leading to membrane failure. Peritonitis is a major cause of PD technique failure and conversion to long-term hemodialysis (1,5,7,8). Recommendations under the auspices of the International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis (ISPD) were first published in 1983 and revised in 1993, 1996, 2000, 2005, and 2010 (9-14). The present recommendations are organized into 5 sections: 1. Peritonitis rate 2. Prevention of peritonitis 3. Initial presentation and management of peritonitis 4. Subsequent management of peritonitis 5.

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 159 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 937 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 %
Japan 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Unknown 935 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 116 12%
Student > Bachelor 99 11%
Student > Postgraduate 94 10%
Researcher 84 9%
Student > Master 73 8%
Other 183 20%
Unknown 288 31%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 424 45%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 75 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 70 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 17 2%
Immunology and Microbiology 9 <1%
Other 42 4%
Unknown 300 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 134. 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 28 July 2026.
All research outputs
#385,040
of 33,241,971 outputs
Outputs from Peritoneal Dialysis International
#6
of 1,694 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,695
of 330,553 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Peritoneal Dialysis International
#1
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 33,241,971 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,694 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 330,553 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.