↓ Skip to main content

Current perspectives on cardiovascular outcome trials in diabetes

Overview of attention for article published in Cardiovascular Diabetology, October 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 (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
60 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
116 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
Current perspectives on cardiovascular outcome trials in diabetes
Published in
Cardiovascular Diabetology, October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12933-016-0456-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Oliver Schnell, Lars Rydén, Eberhard Standl, Antonio Ceriello, on behalf of the D&CVD EASD Study Group

Abstract

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is one of the most common diabetes-associated complications, as well as a leading cause for death in type 2 diabetes patients (T2D). Despite the well-known correlation between the two, up until the 2008 FDA industry guidance for licensing of new anti-hyperglycemic drugs, which required an investigation of cardiovascular outcomes (CVO) of glucose-lowering agents, only a few studies had looked into the relationship between glucose lowering drugs and cardiovascular (CV) risk. Thereafter, CVOT design has focused on non-inferiority short-term studies on high-risk patient populations aiming at capturing CV safety issues. Despite the wealth of information and useful data provided by CVOTs, this approach still suffers from certain limitations. The present review will condense the main results of the most recently completed CVOTs, reflect on the lessons learned, discuss on the issues presented by current CVOT design and offer some suggestions for improvement.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 116 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Russia 1 <1%
Unknown 115 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 9%
Student > Bachelor 10 9%
Researcher 9 8%
Other 9 8%
Other 36 31%
Unknown 26 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 56 48%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 10 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 3%
Computer Science 2 2%
Other 10 9%
Unknown 31 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 22 May 2019.
All research outputs
#2,575,983
of 23,576,969 outputs
Outputs from Cardiovascular Diabetology
#172
of 1,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,718
of 325,946 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cardiovascular Diabetology
#4
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,576,969 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,467 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 325,946 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 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.