↓ Skip to main content

Systems and precision medicine approaches to diabetes heterogeneity: a Big Data perspective

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical and Translational Medicine, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
66 Mendeley
Title
Systems and precision medicine approaches to diabetes heterogeneity: a Big Data perspective
Published in
Clinical and Translational Medicine, July 2017
DOI 10.1186/s40169-017-0155-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Enrico Capobianco

Abstract

Big Data, and in particular Electronic Health Records, provide the medical community with a great opportunity to analyze multiple pathological conditions at an unprecedented depth for many complex diseases, including diabetes. How can we infer on diabetes from large heterogeneous datasets? A possible solution is provided by invoking next-generation computational methods and data analytics tools within systems medicine approaches. By deciphering the multi-faceted complexity of biological systems, the potential of emerging diagnostic tools and therapeutic functions can be ultimately revealed. In diabetes, a multidimensional approach to data analysis is needed to better understand the disease conditions, trajectories and the associated comorbidities. Elucidation of multidimensionality comes from the analysis of factors such as disease phenotypes, marker types, and biological motifs while seeking to make use of multiple levels of information including genetics, omics, clinical data, and environmental and lifestyle factors. Examining the synergy between multiple dimensions represents a challenge. In such regard, the role of Big Data fuels the rise of Precision Medicine by allowing an increasing number of descriptions to be captured from individuals. Thus, data curations and analyses should be designed to deliver highly accurate predicted risk profiles and treatment recommendations. It is important to establish linkages between systems and precision medicine in order to translate their principles into clinical practice. Equivalently, to realize their full potential, the involved multiple dimensions must be able to process information ensuring inter-exchange, reducing ambiguities and redundancies, and ultimately improving health care solutions by introducing clinical decision support systems focused on reclassified phenotypes (or digital biomarkers) and community-driven patient stratifications.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 66 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 21%
Researcher 14 21%
Student > Master 8 12%
Student > Bachelor 4 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Other 9 14%
Unknown 14 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 20%
Computer Science 11 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Engineering 3 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Other 10 15%
Unknown 24 36%
Attention Score in Context

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 31 July 2017.
All research outputs
#20,660,571
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Clinical and Translational Medicine
#752
of 1,060 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#253,089
of 327,041 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical and Translational Medicine
#6
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,060 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 327,041 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.