↓ Skip to main content

Wiley Online Library

Polyethylene glycol‐based bowel preparation before colonoscopy for selected inpatients: A pilot study

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Digestive Diseases, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#17 of 448)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
Title
Polyethylene glycol‐based bowel preparation before colonoscopy for selected inpatients: A pilot study
Published in
Journal of Digestive Diseases, February 2018
DOI 10.1111/1751-2980.12571
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stefano Pontone, Rossella Palma, Cristina Panetta, Chiara Eberspacher, Rita Angelini, Daniele Pironi, Angelo Filippini, Paolo Pontone

Abstract

The aim of our pilot study was to evaluate the impact of a new same-day, low dose, 1-liter polyethylene glycol-based (1L-PEG) bowel preparation on the diagnostic rating and tolerability of selected hospitalized patients with risk factors for inadequate bowel preparation. A single-center prospective pilot study was conducted with hospitalized patients scheduled for colonoscopy, presenting with clinical risk factors for poor bowel preparation, such as bleeding and/or subocclusive symptoms. All included patients were randomly divided in two groups, which received either a same-day 1L-PEG bowel preparation (Group A) or a split-dose 4L-PEG bowel preparation (Group B), and performed a colonoscopy within four hours of the last dose. Forty-four inpatients (male=27; mean age 63.5 years; age range=20-94) were enrolled between August 2015 and August 2016. Optimal bowel cleansing was reached in 63% and 56% (p=.64), of patients in Groups A and B respectively. The adenoma detection rate was 14% (Group A) and 19% (Group B) (p=.34). A valid diagnosis was reached in 38 of 44 patients (86%) (Group A=21; Group B=17) after a mean hospitalization of three days for Group A and six days for Group B (p=.04). Our data support that the schedule protocol proposed in this study enables a clear diagnosis in most of the inpatients facing a high risk for poor bowel preparation and no statistical differences are found between the two groups in terms of successful bowel cleansing achieved. Therefore, the same-day, low dose 1L-PEG bowel preparation could be introduced for selected inpatients.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 30 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 20%
Researcher 5 17%
Other 4 13%
Librarian 2 7%
Student > Postgraduate 2 7%
Other 6 20%
Unknown 5 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 50%
Social Sciences 3 10%
Sports and Recreations 2 7%
Computer Science 1 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 6 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 02 January 2018.
All research outputs
#1,649,530
of 24,484,013 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Digestive Diseases
#17
of 448 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,252
of 335,235 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Digestive Diseases
#1
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,484,013 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 448 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. 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 335,235 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 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 93% of its contemporaries.