↓ Skip to main content

Hypoglycemic Event Frequency and the Effect of Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes Using Multiple Daily Insulin Injections

Overview of attention for article published in Diabetes Therapy, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (63rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 Mendeley
Title
Hypoglycemic Event Frequency and the Effect of Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes Using Multiple Daily Insulin Injections
Published in
Diabetes Therapy, June 2017
DOI 10.1007/s13300-017-0281-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tonya Riddlesworth, David Price, Nathan Cohen, Roy W. Beck

Abstract

The benefits of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in type 1 diabetes have been established among adults using insulin pumps. The DIAMOND randomized clinical trial examined the effectiveness of using CGM in improving glycemic control in participants using insulin injections. The frequency of hypoglycemic events in this trial has not been previously examined. Adults with type 1 diabetes using multiple daily insulin injections (MDI) with A1C values of 7.5% to 9.9% and not using CGM were randomized to adopt CGM (CGM group, n = 105) or continue with usual care (control group, n = 53). CGM data were collected from both groups at the beginning of the study and after 3 and 6 months. A hypoglycemic event was defined as a series of at least CGM values less than 3.0 mmol/L, separated by 20 min or more, with no intervening values of 3.0 mmol/L or more. Hypoglycemic event rates per 24 h were compared using a linear model adjusted for the baseline event rate per 24 h, baseline A1C, and site as a random effect. In the CGM group, the median hypoglycemic event rate fell by 30% (0.23 per 24 h at baseline and 0.16 per 24 h at follow-up) while in the control group the rate was nearly unchanged (0.31 per 24 h at baseline and 0.30 per 24 h at follow-up; p value = 0.03). In the DIAMOND randomized controlled trial, participants in the CGM group experienced a greater reduction in hypoglycemic event rate than participants receiving usual care in the control group. Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02282397.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 25 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 6 24%
Student > Master 5 20%
Other 5 20%
Student > Postgraduate 2 8%
Researcher 2 8%
Other 5 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 44%
Unspecified 8 32%
Psychology 2 8%
Engineering 2 8%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 4%
Other 1 4%

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 15 June 2017.
All research outputs
#5,727,364
of 11,370,524 outputs
Outputs from Diabetes Therapy
#84
of 367 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#96,629
of 267,274 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diabetes Therapy
#6
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,370,524 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 367 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 267,274 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 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.