↓ Skip to main content

Shifting from glucose diagnosis to the new HbA1c diagnosis reduces the capability of the Finnish Diabetes Risk Score (FINDRISC) to screen for glucose abnormalities within a real-life primary…

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, February 2013
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 (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
57 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
138 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Shifting from glucose diagnosis to the new HbA1c diagnosis reduces the capability of the Finnish Diabetes Risk Score (FINDRISC) to screen for glucose abnormalities within a real-life primary healthcare preventive strategy
Published in
BMC Medicine, February 2013
DOI 10.1186/1741-7015-11-45
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bernardo Costa, Francisco Barrio, Josep L Piñol, Joan J Cabré, Xavier Mundet, Ramon Sagarra, Jordi Salas-Salvadó, Oriol Solà-Morales, the DE-PLAN-CAT/PREDICE Research Group

Abstract

To investigate differences in the performance of the Finnish Diabetes Risk Score (FINDRISC) as a screening tool for glucose abnormalities after shifting from glucose-based diagnostic criteria to the proposed new hemoglobin (Hb)A1c-based criteria.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 138 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 2 1%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Unknown 133 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 16%
Unspecified 21 15%
Researcher 15 11%
Student > Bachelor 15 11%
Student > Postgraduate 14 10%
Other 32 23%
Unknown 19 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 52 38%
Unspecified 21 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 4%
Social Sciences 4 3%
Other 15 11%
Unknown 24 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 February 2013.
All research outputs
#3,650,545
of 22,696,971 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#1,921
of 3,403 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,801
of 192,992 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#72
of 96 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,696,971 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,403 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.5. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 192,992 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 84% 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 is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.