↓ Skip to main content

Septic Shock and the Aging Process: A Molecular Comparison

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in immunology, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
5 X users
patent
2 patents
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 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
Septic Shock and the Aging Process: A Molecular Comparison
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, October 2017
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2017.01389
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fabiano Pinheiro da Silva, Marcel Cerqueira César Machado

Abstract

Aging is a continuous process promoted by both intrinsic and extrinsic factors that each trigger a multitude of molecular events. Increasing evidence supports a central role for inflammation in this progression. Here, we discuss how the low-grade chronic inflammation that characterizes aging is tightly interconnected with other important aspects of this process, such as DNA damage, mitochondrial dysfunction, and epigenetic changes. Similarly, inflammation also plays a critical role in many morbid conditions that affect patients who are admitted to Intensive Care. Although the inflammatory response is low grade and persistent in healthy aging while it is acute and severe in critically ill states, we hypothesize that both situations have important interconnections. Here, we performed an extensive review of the literature to investigate this potential link. Because sepsis is the most extensively studied disease and is the leading cause of death in Critical Care, we focus our discussion on comparing the inflammatory profile of healthy older people with that of patients in septic shock to explain why we believe that both situations have synergistic effects, leading to critically ill aged patients having a worse prognosis when compared with critically ill young patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 46 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 15%
Student > Bachelor 7 15%
Researcher 7 15%
Student > Master 5 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 4%
Other 7 15%
Unknown 11 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 30%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 7%
Engineering 2 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 4%
Other 8 17%
Unknown 10 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. 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 24 August 2023.
All research outputs
#1,622,013
of 25,806,080 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#1,456
of 32,415 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,915
of 339,404 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#31
of 571 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,806,080 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 32,415 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 339,404 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 571 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 94% of its contemporaries.