↓ Skip to main content

Efficacy and safety of metformin in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus in older adults: a systematic review for the development of recommendations to reduce potentially inappropriate…

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Geriatrics, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (63rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
194 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
Efficacy and safety of metformin in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus in older adults: a systematic review for the development of recommendations to reduce potentially inappropriate prescribing
Published in
BMC Geriatrics, October 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12877-017-0574-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lisa Schlender, Yolanda V. Martinez, Charles Adeniji, David Reeves, Barbara Faller, Christina Sommerauer, Thekraiat Al Qur’an, Adrine Woodham, Ilkka Kunnamo, Andreas Sönnichsen, Anna Renom-Guiteras

Abstract

Metformin is usually prescribed as first line therapy for type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM2). However, the benefits and risks of metformin may be different for older people. This systematic review examined the available evidence on the safety and efficacy of metformin in the management of DM2 in older adults. The findings were used to develop recommendations for the electronic decision support tool of the European project PRIMA-eDS. The systematic review followed a staged approach, initially searching for systematic reviews and meta-analyses first, and then individual studies when prior searches were inconclusive. The target population was older people (≥65 years old) with DM2. Studies were included if they reported safety or efficacy outcomes with metformin (alone or in combination) for the management of DM2 compared to placebo, usual or no treatment, or other antidiabetics. Using the evidence identified, recommendations were developed using GRADE methodology. Fifteen studies were included (4 intervention and 11 observational studies). In ten studies at least 80% of participants were 65 years or older and 5 studies reported subgroup analyses by age. Comorbidities were reported by 9 studies, cognitive status was reported by 4 studies and functional status by 1 study. In general, metformin showed similar or better safety and efficacy than other specific or non-specific active treatments. However, these findings were mainly based on retrospective observational studies. Four recommendations were developed suggesting to discontinue the use of metformin for the management of DM2 in older adults with risk factors such as age > 80, gastrointestinal complaints during the last year and/or GFR ≤60 ml/min. On the evidence available, the safety and efficacy profiles of metformin appear to be better, and certainly no worse, than other treatments for the management of DM2 in older adults. However, the quality and quantity of the evidence is low, with scarce data on adverse events such as gastrointestinal complaints or renal failure. Further studies are needed to more reliably assess the benefits and risks of metformin in very old (>80), cognitively and functionally impaired older people.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 194 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 194 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 26 13%
Student > Master 24 12%
Researcher 13 7%
Student > Postgraduate 13 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 6%
Other 37 19%
Unknown 69 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 40 21%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 22 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 3%
Neuroscience 4 2%
Other 21 11%
Unknown 81 42%
Attention Score in Context

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 04 January 2018.
All research outputs
#7,229,867
of 23,573,233 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#1,743
of 3,202 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#115,348
of 326,749 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#34
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,573,233 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,202 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.9. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 326,749 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 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.