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 |
Personalizing guidelines for diabetes management: twilight or dawn of the expert?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medicine, July 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1741-7015-11-161 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Stavroula A Paschou, Richard David Leslie |
| Abstract |
This opinion article on the management of type 2 diabetes considers the old and new format of guidelines and critical changes in the character of such guidelines. We highlight limitations of the guidelines and make recommendations for how treatment can be more personalised. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 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 | 3 | 14% |
| United States | 1 | 5% |
| Italy | 1 | 5% |
| Ethiopia | 1 | 5% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 14 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 15 | 71% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 14% |
| Scientists | 2 | 10% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 1% |
| Italy | 1 | 1% |
| Austria | 1 | 1% |
| Denmark | 1 | 1% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 64 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 13 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 17% |
| Other | 8 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 10% |
| Other | 12 | 17% |
| Unknown | 10 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 35% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 6 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 15 | 22% |
| Unknown | 11 | 16% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 14 November 2013.
All research outputs
#1,670,154
of 23,576,969 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#1,173
of 3,569 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,674
of 195,531 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#22
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,576,969 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,569 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 44.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 195,531 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.