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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Safety, effectiveness, and cost of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors versus intermediate acting insulin for type 2 diabetes: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Systematic Reviews, June 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/2046-4053-2-47 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Andrea C Tricco, Jesmin Antony, Charlene Soobiah, Brenda Hemmelgarn, David Moher, Brian Hutton, Catherine H Yu, Sumit R Majumdar, Sharon E Straus |
| Abstract |
Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) results from insulin resistance and relative insulin deficiency. T2DM treatment is a step-wise approach beginning with lifestyle modifications (for example, diet, exercise), followed by the addition of oral hypoglycemic agents (for example, metformin). Patients who do not respond to first-line therapy are offered second-line therapy (for example, sulfonylureas). Third-line therapy may include insulin and/or dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors.It is unclear whether DPP-4 inhibitors are safer and more effective than intermediate acting insulin for third-line management of T2DM. As such, our objective is to evaluate the comparative effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of DPP-4 inhibitors versus intermediate acting insulin for T2DM patients who have failed both first- and second-line diabetes treatments. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 119 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| Ecuador | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 117 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 22 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 19 | 16% |
| Researcher | 17 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 10% |
| Other | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 23 | 19% |
| Unknown | 19 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 35 | 29% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 9% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 9 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 7% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 8 | 7% |
| Other | 23 | 19% |
| Unknown | 25 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 26 November 2013.
All research outputs
#17,690,900
of 22,713,403 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#1,698
of 1,987 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#140,495
of 195,446 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#21
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,713,403 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,987 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 195,446 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.