| Title |
Male Patients with Longstanding Type 2 Diabetes Have a Higher Incidence of Hypoglycemia Compared with Female Patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Diabetes Therapy, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13300-018-0492-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Feng-fei Li, Ying Zhang, Wen-li Zhang, Xiao-mei Liu, Mao-yuan Chen, Yi-xuan Sun, Xiao-fei Su, Jin-dan Wu, Lei Ye, Jian-hua Ma |
| Abstract |
To explore whether there was a gender difference in the risk of hypoglycemia during intensive insulin therapy in patients with longstanding type 2 diabetes (T2D). This was a post hoc analysis of a single-center, open-label and prospective trial. All subjects were admitted as inpatients, underwent a standard bread meal test at baseline and received a 7-day continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) therapy for achieving glycemic control. Patients then were randomized 1:1 to two groups receiving (1) 4 days of Novo Mix 30 followed by 2 days of Humalog Mix 50; (2) 4 days of Humalog Mix 50 followed by 2 days of Novo Mix 30. All patients were subjected to 4-day retrospective continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) during the last 4 days in this study. The primary outcome was the incidences of hypoglycemia monitored by CGM at the end point. A total of 102 patients met the inclusion criteria and completed the study. Our data revealed that 29 patients (28%) experienced hypoglycemia as detected by CGM at the end point. Binary logistic stepwise regression analysis showed that only gender significantly correlated with hypoglycemia (B = 1.17, p = 0.017). Importantly, male patients had a significantly higher incidence of hypoglycemia than female patients (male = 20/52, female = 9/50, p = 0.022), although male patients required significantly lower insulin doses to maintain glycemic control than female patient (p = 0.00). Male patients with longstanding T2D had a higher incidence of hypoglycemia than female patients during intensive insulin therapy. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, ChiCTR-IPR-15007340. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 24 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 17% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Researcher | 2 | 8% |
| Librarian | 1 | 4% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 13% |
| Unknown | 11 | 46% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 21% |
| Sports and Recreations | 2 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 8% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 12 | 50% |
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 23 August 2018.
All research outputs
#15,543,612
of 23,100,534 outputs
Outputs from Diabetes Therapy
#583
of 1,040 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#211,472
of 334,082 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diabetes Therapy
#15
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,100,534 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,040 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 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 334,082 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.