↓ Skip to main content

Detection and Management of Diabetes in England: Results from the Health Survey for England

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Readers on

mendeley
15 Mendeley
Title
Detection and Management of Diabetes in England: Results from the Health Survey for England
Published in
Diabetes Therapy, September 2017
DOI 10.1007/s13300-017-0300-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mimi Xiao, Ciaran O’Neill

Abstract

As part of a control strategy current guidance in the UK recommends more intense surveillance of HbA1C levels among those of South-east Asian or Chinese ethnicity above specified BMI thresholds. The objective of this study was to determine whether disparities in the identification and control of diabetes in England persisted despite these guidelines and assess current strategies in light of these findings. Data were extracted from the 2013 Health Survey for England that included ethnicity, BMI status and HbA1C levels. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression analyses were used to examine relationships among undetected diabetes, poorly controlled diabetes and a range of covariates including ethnicity and BMI. Concentration indices were used to examine the socio-economic gradient in disease detection and control among and between ethnic groups. In regression models that controlled for a range of covariates Asians were found to have a 5% point higher risk of undetected diabetes than Whites. With respect to disease management, Bangladeshis and Pakistanis were found to be at a 28% point and 21% point higher risk of poor disease control respectively than Whites. Concentration indices revealed better disease control among more affluent Whites than poor Whites, no significant pattern between income and disease management was found among Pakistanis and poorer disease control was more evident among more affluent than poorer Bangladeshis. In the UK current guidance recommends practitioners consider testing for diabetes among South-east Asians and Chinese where BMI exceeds 23. Our findings suggest that the risk experienced by Asians in disease detection is independent of BMI and may warrant a more active screening policy than currently recommended. With respect to disease management, our findings suggest that Indians and Pakistanis experience particularly high levels of poor disease control that may also be usefully reflected in guidance.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 33%
Student > Bachelor 4 27%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 13%
Unspecified 2 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 3 20%
Social Sciences 3 20%
Unspecified 2 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 13%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 7%
Other 4 27%

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 25 September 2017.
All research outputs
#9,447,112
of 11,823,343 outputs
Outputs from Diabetes Therapy
#235
of 394 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#197,402
of 269,426 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diabetes Therapy
#20
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,823,343 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 394 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.4. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 269,426 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.