↓ Skip to main content

Cytomegalovirus infection in immunocompetent critically ill adults: literature review

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Intensive Care, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
84 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
116 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
Cytomegalovirus infection in immunocompetent critically ill adults: literature review
Published in
Annals of Intensive Care, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13613-016-0207-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Awad Al-Omari, Fadi Aljamaan, Waleed Alhazzani, Samer Salih, Yaseen Arabi

Abstract

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is increasingly recognized in critically ill immunocompetent patients. Some studies have demonstrated an association between CMV disease and increased mortality rates, prolonged intensive care unit and hospital length of stay, prolonged mechanical ventilation, and nosocomial infections. However, there is a considerable controversy whether such association represents a causal relationship between CMV disease and unfavorable outcomes or just a marker of the severity of the critical illness. Detection of CMV using polymerase chain reaction and CMV antigenemia is the standard diagnostic approach. CMV may have variety of clinical manifestations reflecting the involvement of different organ systems. Treatment of CMV in critical care is challenging due to diagnostic challenge and drug toxicity, and building predictive model for CMV disease in critical care setting would be promising to identify patients at risk and starting prophylactic therapy. Our objective was to broadly review the current literature on the prevalence and incidence, clinical manifestations, potential limitations of different diagnostic modalities, prognosis, and therapeutic options of CMV disease in critically ill patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 116 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 <1%
Unknown 115 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 17%
Student > Bachelor 14 12%
Researcher 13 11%
Student > Postgraduate 12 10%
Other 11 9%
Other 15 13%
Unknown 31 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 49 42%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 4%
Other 11 9%
Unknown 34 29%
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 18 August 2020.
All research outputs
#16,046,973
of 25,382,035 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Intensive Care
#893
of 1,191 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#185,589
of 317,504 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Intensive Care
#11
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,035 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,191 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.2. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 317,504 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 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 50% of its contemporaries.