↓ Skip to main content

The forgotten risk? A systematic review of the effect of reminder systems for postpartum screening for type 2 diabetes in women with previous gestational diabetes

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Research Notes, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (57th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
89 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
The forgotten risk? A systematic review of the effect of reminder systems for postpartum screening for type 2 diabetes in women with previous gestational diabetes
Published in
BMC Research Notes, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13104-015-1334-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Charlotte Jeppesen, Jette Kolding Kristensen, Per Ovesen, Helle Terkildsen Maindal

Abstract

Screening for type 2 diabetes is recommended for women with previous gestational diabetes (GDM). However, the screening rates remain low. We aimed to evaluate the reminders and reminder systems for women with previous GDM and the health professionals in primary and secondary health care with screening rate among postpartum women as primary outcome. Observational and intervention studies were included and the PRISMA guidelines were followed for the literature extraction. Six studies were included: two long-term follow up studies and four early terms. Five studies focused on secondary care settings and one on primary care. Three studies focused on reminders to postpartum women only, two studies to both the women and health care professional, and one study on the health care provider only. Types of reminders varied from letters, emails, and personal telephone calls to the women to register-based reminders or letters to the health care professionals. Reminders were efficient but efficiency varied between studies. Two studies found that direct telephone calls strengthened the reminding of the women. The effect of reminding both the women and the health professional screening rates decreased compared to reminding either health professionals or reminding the women separately. Reminders have a potential for early detection and prevention of type 2 diabetes in this high risk group of women; however, the kind of reminder and the frequency of reminders should be carefully considered accordingly to the target group.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 89 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 15%
Researcher 6 7%
Student > Postgraduate 6 7%
Student > Bachelor 6 7%
Other 15 17%
Unknown 23 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 13%
Social Sciences 5 6%
Computer Science 3 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 3%
Other 15 17%
Unknown 26 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 28 August 2018.
All research outputs
#7,503,741
of 22,925,760 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#1,246
of 4,276 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,444
of 267,738 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#41
of 148 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,925,760 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,276 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 65% 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 267,738 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 57% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 148 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 69% of its contemporaries.