↓ Skip to main content

LEADER 7: cardiovascular risk profiles of US and European participants in the LEADER diabetes trial differ

Overview of attention for article published in Diabetology & Metabolic Syndrome, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 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
LEADER 7: cardiovascular risk profiles of US and European participants in the LEADER diabetes trial differ
Published in
Diabetology & Metabolic Syndrome, June 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13098-016-0153-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Guy E. H. M. Rutten, Cees J. Tack, Thomas R. Pieber, Abdurrahman Comlekci, David Dynnes Ørsted, Florian M. M. Baeres, Steven P. Marso, John B. Buse

Abstract

To determine whether US and European participants in the Liraglutide Effect and Action in Diabetes: Evaluation of cardiovascular outcome Results (LEADER) trial differ regarding risk factors for cardiovascular mortality and morbidity. Baseline data, stratified for prior cardiovascular disease (CVD), were compared using multivariable logistic regression analysis to establish whether region is an independent determinant of achieved targets for glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), blood pressure (BP), and low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol. Independent of CVD history, US participants were more often of non-White origin and had a longer history of type 2 diabetes, higher body weight, and higher baseline HbA1c. They had substantially lower systolic and diastolic BP, and a marginally lower LDL-cholesterol level. Fewer US participants were diagnosed with left ventricular dysfunction. In the largest group of patients, those with prior CVD and the highest cardiovascular risk, US participants were more often female, had a higher waist circumference, and had a decreased estimated glomerular filtration rate, but less frequently prior myocardial infarction or angina pectoris. There were baseline differences between US and European participants. These differences may result from variation in regional targets for cardiovascular risk factor management, and should be considered in the analysis and reporting of the trial results. Clinical trial identifier: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01179048.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Malaysia 1 3%
Unknown 38 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 13%
Student > Master 4 10%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Other 3 8%
Other 8 21%
Unknown 8 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 44%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 8%
Unspecified 2 5%
Computer Science 2 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 11 28%

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 08 June 2016.
All research outputs
#16,896,974
of 19,101,906 outputs
Outputs from Diabetology & Metabolic Syndrome
#447
of 516 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#230,596
of 276,311 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diabetology & Metabolic Syndrome
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,101,906 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 516 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. 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 276,311 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