↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of serum PCT and CRP levels in patients infected by different pathogenic microorganisms: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 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
Comparison of serum PCT and CRP levels in patients infected by different pathogenic microorganisms: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research, January 2018
DOI 10.1590/1414-431x20176783
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jun-Hua Tang, Dong-Ping Gao, Peng-Fei Zou

Abstract

To avoid the abuse and misuse of antibiotics, procalcitonin (PCT) and C-reactive protein (CRP) have been used as new approaches to identify different types of infection. Multiple databases were adopted to search relevant studies, and the articles that satisfied the inclusion criteria were included. Meta-analyses were conducted with Review Manager 5.0, and to estimate the quality of each article, risk of bias was assessed. Eight articles satisfied the inclusion criteria. The concentrations of both PCT and CRP in patients with bacterial infection were higher than those with non-bacterial infection. Both PCT and CRP levels in patients with G- bacterial infection were higher than in those with G+ bacterial infection and fungus infection. In the G+ bacterial infection group, a higher concentration of CRP was observed compared with fungus infection group, while the difference of PCT between G+ bacterial infection and fungus infection was not significant. Our study suggested that both PCT and CRP are helpful to a certain extent in detecting pneumonia caused by different types of infection.

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 readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 54 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 13%
Other 5 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Student > Postgraduate 4 7%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 27 50%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Engineering 2 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 2%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 27 50%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 16 June 2018.
All research outputs
#16,728,456
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research
#710
of 1,254 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#270,559
of 449,583 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research
#25
of 85 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,254 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 449,583 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 85 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 65% of its contemporaries.