Predictors of survival in sepsis: What is the best inflammatory marker to measure?
Current Opinion in Infectious Diseases, ISSN: 0951-7375, Vol: 25, Issue: 3, Page: 328-336
2012
- 79Citations
- 101Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations79
- Citation Indexes78
- 78
- CrossRef53
- Policy Citations1
- 1
- Captures101
- Readers101
- 82
- 19
Review Description
Purpose of review: Sepsis is relevant due to its high morbidity and mortality. For both sepsis diagnosis and outcome prediction many biomarkers have been described in the literature. Most of these markers are objects of scientific interest rather than being introduced into daily clinical practice. However, due to their unspecific character and their insufficient predictive value for the individual person, research focus is still on new aspects in sepsis-related biomarkers. Recent findings: Beyond the widely used acute-phase proteins C-reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin (PCT), many new molecules have been studied deriving from different organs or cells affected, due to the systemic nature of sepsis. Cytokines, coagulation factors/characteristics, vasoactive hormones, and several others have been recently proved to be relevant in sepsis syndrome and probably useful for outcome prediction. However, single time point measurements may be less predictive than consideration of the time-dependent course of parameters. Clinical decision just based on a biomarker is still not feasible because of the huge inter-individual differences in the inflammatory response. Summary: Many biomarkers display relevant correlation with the clinical outcome of patients with severe sepsis and septic shock. Consideration of their time courses may be more reliable than absolute levels. Clinical decision should not be based only on biomarkers but organ dysfunctions, for example, should also be taken into account. © 2012 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84861096769&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/qco.0b013e3283522038; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22421751; http://journals.lww.com/00001432-201206000-00014; http://content.wkhealth.com/linkback/openurl?sid=WKPTLP:landingpage&an=00001432-201206000-00014; https://dx.doi.org/10.1097/qco.0b013e3283522038; https://insights.ovid.com/article/00001432-201206000-00014
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know