↓ Skip to main content

How common are foot problems among individuals with diabetes? Diabetic foot ulcers in the Dutch population

Overview of attention for article published in Diabetologia, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
21 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 Mendeley
Title
How common are foot problems among individuals with diabetes? Diabetic foot ulcers in the Dutch population
Published in
Diabetologia, April 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00125-017-4274-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robert M. Stoekenbroek, Joost L.C. Lokin, Mark M. Nielen, Erik S.G. Stroes, Mark J.W. Koelemay

Abstract

Contemporary data on diabetic foot ulcer prevalence are scarce. Most studies were conducted in the 1990s, reporting incidence rates of 1.9-2.6%. Since then the prevalence of diabetes has doubled and the organisation of diabetes care has undergone major changes. Up-to-date data that quantify the occurrence of diabetic foot ulcers are required and could serve as baseline measures for future studies. Individuals with diabetes (n = 81,793) were identified from the NIVEL (Netherlands institute for health services research) Primary Care Database, which contains data for standardised routine care and is representative of the Dutch population. The annual incidence rates of ulcers and other foot abnormalities were calculated using data collected between 2010 and 2013. To account for inaccuracies, incidence rates were calculated using: (1) only individuals with a documented foot examination; (2) all individuals; and (3) individuals with explicit documentation of present/absent foot ulceration. There were 412 individuals with documented ulceration during the registration period (0.50%). The annual incidence rate of foot ulcers was 0.34% (range 0.22-1.08%). Of those individuals with a documented foot examination, 14.6% had absent pedal pulsations, 17.3% had neuropathy and 10.1% had callus/pressure marks. The annual incidence rate of foot ulcers in the current study was lower than previously reported. This observation could reflect the efficacy of screening practices and an increased awareness among professionals and patients. Nevertheless, approximately one in every five diabetic individuals had at least one identifiable risk factor on foot examination. This signifies the importance of preventive screening.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 tweeters 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 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 40 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 11 28%
Researcher 7 18%
Unspecified 6 15%
Student > Master 5 13%
Student > Postgraduate 3 8%
Other 8 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 53%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 20%
Unspecified 6 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Psychology 1 3%
Other 3 8%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 12 July 2017.
All research outputs
#881,860
of 11,459,905 outputs
Outputs from Diabetologia
#522
of 3,462 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,368
of 267,660 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diabetologia
#29
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,459,905 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,462 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 267,660 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 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 55% of its contemporaries.