| Title |
Why Are Clinicians Not Embracing the Results from Pivotal Clinical Trials in Severe Sepsis? A Bayesian Analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, May 2008
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0002291 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Andre C. Kalil, Junfeng Sun |
| Abstract |
Five pivotal clinical trials (Intensive Insulin Therapy; Recombinant Human Activated Protein C [rhAPC]; Low-Tidal Volume; Low-Dose Steroid; Early Goal-Directed Therapy [EGDT]) demonstrated mortality reduction in patients with severe sepsis and expert guidelines have recommended them to clinical practice. Yet, the adoption of these therapies remains low among clinicians. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 4% |
| Brazil | 2 | 4% |
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 44 | 90% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 9 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 10% |
| Researcher | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 13 | 27% |
| Unknown | 6 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 33 | 67% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Engineering | 2 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Philosophy | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 9 | 18% |