↓ Skip to main content

Do the classification of areas and distance matter to the assessment results of achieving the treatment targets among type 2 diabetes patients?

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Health Geographics, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 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
Do the classification of areas and distance matter to the assessment results of achieving the treatment targets among type 2 diabetes patients?
Published in
International Journal of Health Geographics, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12942-015-0020-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maija Toivakka, Tiina Laatikainen, Timo Kumpula, Markku Tykkyläinen

Abstract

Type 2 diabetes is a major health concern all over the world. The prevention of diabetes is important but so is well-balanced diabetes care. Diabetes care can be influenced by individual and neighborhood socio-economic factors and geographical accessibility to health care services. The aim of the study is to find out whether two different area classifications of urban and rural areas give different area-level results of achieving the targets of control and treatment among type 2 diabetes patients exemplified by a Finnish region. The study exploits geo-referenced patient data from a regional primary health care patient database combined with postal code area-level socio-economic variables, digital road data and two grid based classifications of areas: an urban-rural dichotomy and a classification with seven area types. The achievement of control and treatment targets were assessed using the patient's individual laboratory data among 9606 type 2 diabetes patients. It was assessed whether hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) was controlled and whether the recommended level of HbA1c was achieved in patients by different area classes and as a function of distance. Chi square test and logistic regression analysis were used for testing. The study reveals that area-level inequalities exist in the care of type 2 diabetes in a detailed 7-class area classification but if the simple dichotomy of urban and rural is applied differences vanish. The patient's gender and age, area-level education and the area class they belonged to were associated with achievements of control and treatment targets. Longer distance to health care services was not a barrier to good achievements of control or treatment targets. A more detailed grid-based area classification is better for showing spatial differences in the care of type 2 diabetes patients. Inequalities exist but it would be misleading to state that the differences are simply due to urban or rural location or due to distance. From a planning point of view findings suggest that detailed geo-coded patient information could be utilized more in resourcing and targeting the health care services to find the area-level needs of care and to improve the cost-efficient allocation of resources.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Nigeria 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 57 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 22%
Student > Master 10 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 12%
Student > Bachelor 6 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 10%
Other 12 20%
Unknown 5 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 29%
Social Sciences 9 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 12%
Environmental Science 5 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 5%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 10 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 30 September 2015.
All research outputs
#16,602,402
of 18,767,621 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Health Geographics
#524
of 605 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#216,142
of 261,574 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Health Geographics
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,767,621 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 605 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 261,574 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them