↓ Skip to main content

Diet quality and therapeutic targets in patients with type 2 diabetes: evaluation of concordance between dietary indexes

Overview of attention for article published in Nutrition Journal, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 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
Diet quality and therapeutic targets in patients with type 2 diabetes: evaluation of concordance between dietary indexes
Published in
Nutrition Journal, November 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12937-017-0296-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Juliana Peçanha Antonio, Vanessa Costa da Rosa, Roberta Aguiar Sarmento, Jussara Carnevale de Almeida

Abstract

This study aimed to evaluate the concordance between two dietary indexes, the Healthy Eating Index (HEI) and the Diabetes Healthy Eating Index (DHEI), in evaluating diet quality and its possible association with therapeutic targets in patients with type 2 diabetes. Cross-sectional study of outpatients with type 2 diabetes mellitus treated at a university hospital. Dietary information was obtained from a quantitative food frequency questionnaire (previously validated for use in patients with type 2 diabetes) and converted into daily intakes. Diet quality was assessed using two dietary indexes: HEI (12 components, nine food groups and three moderation components) and DHEI (10 components, six food groups, three nutrient groups, and one for variety of diet). In both indexes, the sum of the scores for each component yields an overall score converted on a scale from 0 to 100%; diet quality is subsequently ranked as low (<51%), needing improvement (51-80%), or high (>80%). Patients underwent clinical and laboratory assessment. Those with fasting blood glucose values 70-130 mg/dL, A1c < 7%, total cholesterol <200 mg/dL, LDL-cholesterol <100 mg/dL, and triglycerides <150 mg/dL were considered to meet therapeutic targets. All analyses were conducted in PASW Statistics 18.0, and p < 0.05 deemed significant. We analyzed 148 patients with type 2 diabetes (73% white, mean age 63.2 ± 9.4 years, median diabetes duration 10 [IQR 5-19] years, mean A1c% 8.4 ± 2.0%, and mean BMI 30.5 ± 4.2 kg/m2). Mean energy intake was 2114 ± 649 kcal/day. DHEI scores were 17.0 (95%CI -6.8 to 41.0) points lower than HEI scores (55.9 ± 14.2% vs. 72.9 ± 10.7%, respectively; P < 0.001), suggesting there is no agreement (Bland-Altman method), and the Pearson correlation coefficient was 0.55 (P < 0.001). More patients were classified as having a low-quality diet by the DHEI than by the HEI (38.5% vs. 1.4%; P < 0.001). A higher proportion of patients (35.7%) with out-of-target total cholesterol levels had a low-quality diet evaluated by the DHEI (P = 0.03). We did not find associations between overall score of HEI and therapeutic targets. In its intended population of patients with type 2 diabetes, the DHEI seems to be a more rigorous tool to evaluate association between diet quality and changes in metabolic parameters.

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 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 70 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 14%
Student > Bachelor 9 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 7%
Other 3 4%
Researcher 3 4%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 30 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 30 43%
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 15 December 2017.
All research outputs
#14,832,856
of 23,011,300 outputs
Outputs from Nutrition Journal
#1,124
of 1,438 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#247,982
of 437,757 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutrition Journal
#15
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,011,300 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,438 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 36.2. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 437,757 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.