| Title |
Lipodystrophy in Insulin-Treated Subjects and Other Injection-Site Skin Reactions: Are We Sure Everything is Clear?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Diabetes Therapy, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13300-016-0187-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sandro Gentile, Felice Strollo, Antonio Ceriello, On behalf of the AMD-OSDI Injection Technique Study Group |
| Abstract |
Physicians and patients have long been aware of skin lesions at the sites of insulin injections, referred to as lipodystrophy that can present as lipoatrophy (LA) or lipohypertrophy (LH). However, the reported prevalence of these different skin lesions varies widely, emphasizing the need for a correct identification method. In this short review we discuss LA and LH and also take into account other skin lesions, such as bruising, as well as different needle injuries, including those associated with the subcutaneous injection of pegvisomant (a drug aimed at counteracting the high levels of growth hormone associated with acromegaly), long-acting exenatide (a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist), and anti-tumor necrosis factor-alpha biologic agents (used against Crohn's disease). In these latter cases specific studies are warranted to understand the pathophysiological background and possible prevention. However, the most common lesion is still insulin injection site-related LD, so a strong effort has to be made to avoid the confusion generated by previously misleading classifications which were barely able to reliably distinguish between LA and LH. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 3 | 25% |
| Ireland | 2 | 17% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 8% |
| Japan | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 5 | 42% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 17% |
| Scientists | 1 | 8% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 99 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 20 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 16 | 16% |
| Researcher | 8 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 16 | 16% |
| Unknown | 26 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 28 | 28% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 17 | 17% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 12% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 11 | 11% |
| Unknown | 27 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 14 March 2023.
All research outputs
#2,551,124
of 24,818,814 outputs
Outputs from Diabetes Therapy
#114
of 1,114 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,235
of 374,124 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diabetes Therapy
#4
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,818,814 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 1,114 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 89% 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 374,124 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 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.