↓ Skip to main content

Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus failing on oral agents and starting once daily insulin regimen; a small randomized study investigating effects of adding vildagliptin

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Research Notes, August 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 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
Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus failing on oral agents and starting once daily insulin regimen; a small randomized study investigating effects of adding vildagliptin
Published in
BMC Research Notes, August 2014
DOI 10.1186/1756-0500-7-579
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wendela Lucia de Ranitz-Greven, Joline Wilhelma Johanna Beulens, Lette Birgit Elisabeth Anne Hoeks, Gerdien Belle-van Meerkerk, Douwe Hedde Biesma, Harold Wessel de Valk

Abstract

The addition of a DDP4-inhibitor to existing insulin therapy reduces HbA1c. However, no data exist about the addition of these agents at the beginning of insulin treatment in type 2 diabetes while this could especially be interesting because it is during this period that considerable residual beta cell function is still present. The benefit of such a strategy could be a lower insulin dose required for glycemic control. The hypothesis of our study was that adding a DPP4-inhibitor at the beginning of insulin treatment could lead to less exogenous insulin requirement, a reduction of hyperinsulinemia and side effects (hypoglycemia and weight gain), less glucose variability and improvement of insulin and glucagon dynamics during a mixed meal test.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 20%
Student > Master 6 13%
Researcher 6 13%
Other 4 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 13 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 16%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 7%
Engineering 2 4%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 14 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 May 2015.
All research outputs
#13,411,842
of 22,761,738 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#1,681
of 4,262 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#111,743
of 236,210 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#59
of 132 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,761,738 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,262 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 236,210 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 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 132 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 53% of its contemporaries.