↓ Skip to main content

High nutritional risk is associated with unfavorable outcomes in patients admitted to an intensive care unit

Overview of attention for article published in Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva, January 2019
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 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
High nutritional risk is associated with unfavorable outcomes in patients admitted to an intensive care unit
Published in
Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva, January 2019
DOI 10.5935/0103-507x.20190041
Pubmed ID
Authors

Julia Marchetti, Audrey Machado dos Reis, Amanda Forte dos Santos, Oellen Stuani Franzosi, Vivian Cristine Luft, Thais Steemburgo

Abstract

To evaluate possible associations between nutritional risk and the clinical outcomes of critical patients admitted to an intensive care unit. A prospective study was carried out with a cohort comprising 200 patients admitted to a university hospital intensive care unit. Nutritional risk was assessed with the NRS-2002 and NUTRIC scores. Patients with scores ≥ 5 were considered at high nutritional risk. Clinical data and outcome measures were obtained from patients' medical records. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to calculate odds ratios and their respective 95% confidence intervals (for clinical outcomes). This sample of critical patients had a mean age of 59.4 ± 16.5 years and 53.5% were female. The proportions at high nutritional risk according to NRS-2002 and NUTRIC were 55% and 36.5%, respectively. Multiple logistic regression models adjusted for gender and type of admission indicated that high nutritional risk assessed by the NRS-2002 was positively associated with use of mechanical ventilation (OR = 2.34; 95%CI 1.31 - 4.19; p = 0.004); presence of infection (OR = 2.21; 95%CI 1.24 - 3.94; p = 0.007), and death (OR = 1.86; 95%CI 1.01 - 3.41; p = 0.045). When evaluated by NUTRIC, nutritional risk was associated with renal replacement therapy (OR = 2.10; 95%CI 1.02 - 4.15; p = 0.040) and death (OR = 3.48; 95%CI 1.88 - 6.44; p < 0.001). In critically ill patients, high nutritional risk was positively associated with an increased risk of clinical outcomes including hospital death.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 29%
Student > Master 2 10%
Researcher 2 10%
Other 1 5%
Student > Postgraduate 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 9 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 6 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 19%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 5%
Unknown 9 43%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 October 2019.
All research outputs
#11,024,033
of 17,071,340 outputs
Outputs from Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva
#115
of 267 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#203,105
of 335,312 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,071,340 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 267 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 335,312 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them