| Title |
Salicylates and pandemic influenza mortality, 1918-1919 pharmacology, pathology, and historic evidence.
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Infectious Diseases, November 2009
|
| DOI | 10.1086/606060 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Karen M Starko |
| Abstract |
The high case-fatality rate--especially among young adults--during the 1918-1919 influenza pandemic is incompletely understood. Although late deaths showed bacterial pneumonia, early deaths exhibited extremely "wet," sometimes hemorrhagic lungs. The hypothesis presented herein is that aspirin contributed to the incidence and severity of viral pathology, bacterial infection, and death, because physicians of the day were unaware that the regimens (8.0-31.2 g per day) produce levels associated with hyperventilation and pulmonary edema in 33% and 3% of recipients, respectively. Recently, pulmonary edema was found at autopsy in 46% of 26 salicylate-intoxicated adults. Experimentally, salicylates increase lung fluid and protein levels and impair mucociliary clearance. In 1918, the US Surgeon General, the US Navy, and the Journal of the American Medical Association recommended use of aspirin just before the October death spike. If these recommendations were followed, and if pulmonary edema occurred in 3% of persons, a significant proportion of the deaths may be attributable to aspirin. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 1,195 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 212 | 18% |
| United Kingdom | 52 | 4% |
| Brazil | 45 | 4% |
| Canada | 23 | 2% |
| Japan | 22 | 2% |
| Australia | 20 | 2% |
| Serbia | 9 | <1% |
| France | 9 | <1% |
| Italy | 8 | <1% |
| Other | 91 | 8% |
| Unknown | 704 | 59% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1099 | 92% |
| Scientists | 45 | 4% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 36 | 3% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 13 | 1% |
| Unknown | 2 | <1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 3% |
| Vietnam | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 88 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 15 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 11% |
| Other | 9 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 9% |
| Other | 21 | 23% |
| Unknown | 19 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 27 | 29% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 15 | 16% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 5 | 5% |
| Chemistry | 4 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 17 | 18% |
| Unknown | 22 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1474. 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 16 April 2024.
All research outputs
#8,261
of 25,744,802 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Infectious Diseases
#41
of 16,957 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10
of 109,668 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Infectious Diseases
#1
of 96 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,744,802 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,957 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 31.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 109,668 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 96 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 98% of its contemporaries.