| Title |
A Review of Insulin-Dosing Formulas for Continuous Subcutaneous Insulin Infusion (CSII) for Adults with Type 1 Diabetes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Diabetes Reports, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11892-016-0772-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Allen B. King, Akio Kuroda, Munehide Matsuhisa, Todd Hobbs |
| Abstract |
Dosing guidelines for patients with type 1 diabetes using continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII), which are historically based on clinical experience and retrospective studies of patients consuming an American diet, recommend that basal insulin should represent approximately 50 % of the total daily dose (TDD). Recent prospective studies in the USA and Japan conclude that the more appropriate proportion is closer to 30-40 % of TDD. In addition, currently used formulas for calculating the carbohydrate-to-insulin ratio (CIR) and correction factor (CF) may lead to underdosing of bolus insulin by as much as 12.8-50 % for a hypothetical patient. The discrepancies between traditional formulas and data from newer studies can be accounted for by the more rigorous design of the newer studies (e.g., prospective design, controlled diets, meal omission, and frequent glucose monitoring). International differences in diet composition may also be important to consider when developing dosing recommendations for CSII. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 8 | 57% |
| Australia | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 5 | 36% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 57% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 29% |
| Scientists | 1 | 7% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 86 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 9% |
| Researcher | 7 | 8% |
| Other | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 18 | 21% |
| Unknown | 26 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 27 | 31% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 8% |
| Computer Science | 5 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 14 | 16% |
| Unknown | 28 | 32% |
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 30 June 2022.
All research outputs
#2,426,308
of 23,576,969 outputs
Outputs from Current Diabetes Reports
#126
of 1,024 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,092
of 367,468 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Diabetes Reports
#4
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,576,969 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,024 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 367,468 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.