↓ Skip to main content

The restorative effects of pulsed infrared light therapy on significant loss of peripheral protective sensation in patients with long-term type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus

Overview of attention for article published in Acta Diabetologica, May 2006
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
The restorative effects of pulsed infrared light therapy on significant loss of peripheral protective sensation in patients with long-term type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus
Published in
Acta Diabetologica, May 2006
DOI 10.1007/s00592-006-0207-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

D. A. Arnall, A. G. Nelson, L. López, N. Sanz, L. Iversen, I. Sanz, L. Stambaugh, S. B. Arnall

Abstract

Pulsed infrared light therapy (PILT) has been shown to increase peripheral sensation in diabetic patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN). However, most studies last for very short periods, with the subjects receiving only 6-20 treatments. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of an eight-week course of PILT in reversing long-standing, profound DPN in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Twenty-two subjects with a diagnosis of type 1 (n=2) or type 2 (n=20) diabetes participated in the study. PILT was administered to one foot chosen at random with the other foot serving as a within-subject control (no treatment). Patients underwent 24 treatments (3 times/week, for eight weeks) for 30 min per treatment. Changes in peripheral protective sensation (PPS) were measured using Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments (SWM) ranging from 3.7 to 6.48. PILT improved PPS even in patients with long-standing chronic neuropathies whose initial pre-study sensation was not measurable with a 200-g SWM. PILT significantly improves PPS. While the exact mechanism of action is not understood, infrared light may improve peripheral neuropathies by improving foot perfusion by stimulating nitric oxide production.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 5%
Unknown 21 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 23%
Researcher 3 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 14%
Other 2 9%
Librarian 2 9%
Other 7 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 41%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 14%
Sports and Recreations 2 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 9%
Psychology 1 5%
Other 5 23%

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 04 September 2018.
All research outputs
#9,662,222
of 12,588,563 outputs
Outputs from Acta Diabetologica
#300
of 494 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#151,012
of 239,986 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Acta Diabetologica
#4
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,588,563 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 494 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 239,986 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.