↓ Skip to main content

Pediatric Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: Fluid Management in the PICU

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Pediatrics, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
44 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
79 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
Pediatric Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: Fluid Management in the PICU
Published in
Frontiers in Pediatrics, March 2016
DOI 10.3389/fped.2016.00021
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sarah A. Ingelse, Roelie M. Wösten-van Asperen, Joris Lemson, Joost G. Daams, Reinout A., Job B. van Woensel

Abstract

The administration of an appropriate volume of intravenous fluids, while avoiding fluid overload, is a major challenge in the pediatric intensive care unit. Despite our efforts, fluid overload is a very common clinical observation in critically ill children, in particular in those with pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome (PARDS). Patients with ARDS have widespread damage of the alveolar-capillary barrier, potentially making them vulnerable to fluid overload with the development of pulmonary edema leading to prolonged course of disease. Indeed, studies in adults with ARDS have shown that an increased cumulative fluid balance is associated with adverse outcome. However, age-related differences in the development and consequences of fluid overload in ARDS may exist due to disparities in immunologic response and body water distribution. This systematic review summarizes the current literature on fluid imbalance and management in PARDS, with special emphasis on potential differences with adult patients. It discusses the adverse effects associated with fluid overload and the corresponding possible pathophysiological mechanisms of its development. Our intent is to provide an incentive to develop age-specific fluid management protocols to improve PARDS outcomes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 78 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 14 18%
Researcher 12 15%
Student > Postgraduate 8 10%
Student > Master 6 8%
Student > Bachelor 4 5%
Other 16 20%
Unknown 19 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 49 62%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 1%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 1%
Other 1 1%
Unknown 20 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 03 February 2021.
All research outputs
#6,770,539
of 24,137,933 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pediatrics
#1,187
of 6,928 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#91,363
of 304,109 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pediatrics
#12
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,137,933 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,928 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 304,109 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 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 71% of its contemporaries.