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 |
The cardiovascular safety of incretin-based therapies: a review of the evidence
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cardiovascular Diabetology, September 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1475-2840-12-130 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
John R Petrie |
| Abstract |
Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in people with diabetes and therefore managing cardiovascular (CV) risk is a critical component of diabetes care. As incretin-based therapies are effective recent additions to the glucose-lowering treatment armamentarium for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D), understanding their CV safety profiles is of great importance. Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists have been associated with beneficial effects on CV risk factors, including weight, blood pressure and lipid profiles. Encouragingly, mechanistic studies in preclinical models and in patients with acute coronary syndrome suggest a potential cardioprotective effect of native GLP-1 or GLP-1 receptor agonists following ischaemia. Moreover, meta-analyses of phase 3 development programme data indicate no increased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) with incretin-based therapies. Large randomized controlled trials designed to evaluate long-term CV outcomes with incretin-based therapies in individuals with T2D are now in progress, with the first two reporting as this article went to press. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 3% |
| Unknown | 77 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 14 | 18% |
| Researcher | 13 | 16% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 10 | 13% |
| Other | 9 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 10% |
| Other | 12 | 15% |
| Unknown | 13 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 48 | 61% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 5% |
| Unknown | 15 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 03 November 2016.
All research outputs
#7,960,052
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Cardiovascular Diabetology
#616
of 1,653 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#64,946
of 209,239 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cardiovascular Diabetology
#1
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,653 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 209,239 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.