↓ Skip to main content

Renal Dosing of Antibiotics: Are We Jumping the Gun?

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Infectious Diseases, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
245 tweeters
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
55 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
Renal Dosing of Antibiotics: Are We Jumping the Gun?
Published in
Clinical Infectious Diseases, September 2018
DOI 10.1093/cid/ciy790
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ryan L Crass, Keith A Rodvold, Bruce A Mueller, Manjunath P Pai

Abstract

Antibiotic renal dose adjustments are determined in subjects with stable chronic kidney disease and may not translate to patients in late phase trials and practice. Ceftolozane/tazobactam, ceftazidime/avibactam, and telavancin all carry precautionary statements for reduced clinical response in patients with baseline creatinine clearance 30 - 50 mL/min, potentially due to unnecessary dose reduction in the setting of acute kidney injury (AKI). In this review, we discuss the regulatory landscape for antibiotics eliminated by the kidney and highlight the importance of the first 48 hours of therapy. Using a clinical database, we identify AKI on admission in a substantial proportion of patients with pneumonia (27.1%), intra-abdominal (19.5%), urinary tract (20.0%), or skin and skin structure infections (9.7%) that resolved by 48 hours in 57.2% of cases. We suggest that deferred renal dose reduction of wide therapeutic index antibiotics could improve outcomes in patients with infectious diseases.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 245 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 55 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 14 25%
Researcher 8 15%
Student > Master 5 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 9%
Student > Postgraduate 4 7%
Other 14 25%
Unknown 5 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 45%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 11 20%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 11 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 164. 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 March 2020.
All research outputs
#100,713
of 14,574,717 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Infectious Diseases
#140
of 11,731 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,745
of 271,757 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Infectious Diseases
#3
of 169 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,574,717 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,731 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 271,757 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 169 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 98% of its contemporaries.