↓ Skip to main content

Presentations of major peripheral arterial disease and risk of major outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes: results from the ADVANCE-ON study

Overview of attention for article published in Cardiovascular Diabetology, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
81 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
262 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
Presentations of major peripheral arterial disease and risk of major outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes: results from the ADVANCE-ON study
Published in
Cardiovascular Diabetology, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12933-016-0446-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kamel Mohammedi, Mark Woodward, Yoichiro Hirakawa, Sophia Zoungas, Stephen Colagiuri, Pavel Hamet, Stephen Harrap, Neil Poulter, David R. Matthews, Michel Marre, John Chalmers, on behalf of the ADVANCE Collaborative Group

Abstract

Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) is known to be associated with high cardiovascular risk, but the individual impact of PAD presentations on risk of macrovascular and microvascular events has not been reliably compared in patients with type 2 diabetes. We aimed to evaluate the impact of major PAD, and its different presentations, on the 10-year risk of death, major macrovascular events, and major clinical microvascular events in these patients. Participants in the action in diabetes and vascular disease: PreterAx and DiamicroN modified-release controlled evaluation (ADVANCE) trial and the ADVANCE-ON post-trial study were followed for a median of 5.0 (in-trial), 5.4 (post-trial), and 9.9 (overall) years. Major PAD at baseline was subdivided into lower-extremity chronic ulceration or amputation secondary to vascular disease and history of peripheral revascularization by angioplasty or surgery. Among 11,140 participants, 516 (4.6 %) had major PAD at baseline: 300 (2.7 %) had lower-extremity ulceration or amputation alone, 190 (1.7 %) had peripheral revascularization alone, and 26 (0.2 %) had both presentations. All-cause mortality, major macrovascular events, and major clinical microvascular events occurred in 2265 (20.3 %), 2166 (19.4 %), and 807 (7.2 %) participants, respectively. Compared to those without PAD, patients with major PAD had increased rates of all-cause mortality (HR 1.35, 95 % CI 1.15-1.60, p = 0.0004), and major macrovascular events (1.47 [1.23-1.75], p < 0.0001), after multiple adjustments for region of origin, cardiovascular risk factors and treatments, peripheral neuropathy markers, and randomized treatments. We have also observed a trend toward an association of baseline PAD with risk of major clinical microvascular events [1.31 (0.96-1.78), p = 0.09]. These associations were comparable for patients with a lower-extremity ulceration or amputation and for those with a history of peripheral revascularization. Furthermore, the risk of retinal photocoagulation or blindness, but not renal events, increased in patients with lower-extremity ulceration or amputation [1.53 (1.01-2.30), p = 0.04]. Lower-extremity ulceration or amputation, and peripheral revascularization both increased the risks of death and cardiovascular events, but only lower-extremity ulceration or amputation increased the risk of severe retinopathy in patients with type 2 diabetes. Screening for major PAD and its management remain crucial for cardiovascular prevention in patients with type 2 diabetes (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00949286).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 262 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 262 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 42 16%
Student > Master 27 10%
Researcher 23 9%
Other 18 7%
Student > Postgraduate 15 6%
Other 48 18%
Unknown 89 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 91 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 35 13%
Sports and Recreations 8 3%
Engineering 5 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 2%
Other 21 8%
Unknown 98 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 February 2020.
All research outputs
#2,713,822
of 22,886,568 outputs
Outputs from Cardiovascular Diabetology
#174
of 1,386 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,561
of 337,011 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cardiovascular Diabetology
#4
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,886,568 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,386 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 337,011 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.