↓ Skip to main content

Prognostic Implications of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in Ischemic and Nonischemic Heart Failure

Overview of attention for article published in JACC, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
14 news outlets
twitter
28 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
77 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
69 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Prognostic Implications of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in Ischemic and Nonischemic Heart Failure
Published in
JACC, September 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.jacc.2016.06.061
Pubmed ID
Authors

Isabelle Johansson, Ulf Dahlström, Magnus Edner, Per Näsman, Lars Rydén, Anna Norhammar

Abstract

Heart failure (HF) is a common and serious complication in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The prognosis of ischemic HF and impact of revascularization in such patients have not been investigated fully in a patient population representing everyday practice. This study examined the impact of ischemic versus nonischemic HF and previous revascularization on long-term prognosis in an unselected population of patients with and without T2DM. Patients stratified by diabetes status and ischemic or nonischemic HF and history of revascularization in the Swedish Heart Failure Registry (SwedeHF) from 2003 to 2011 were followed up for mortality predictors and longevity. A propensity score analysis was applied to evaluate the impact of previous revascularization. Among 35,163 HF patients, those with T2DM were younger, and 90% had 1 or more associated comorbidities. Ischemic heart disease (IHD) occurred in 62% of patients with T2DM and 47% of those without T2DM, of whom 53% and 48%, respectively, had previously undergone revascularization. T2DM predicted mortality regardless of the presence of IHD, with adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of 1.40 (1.33 to 1.46) and 1.30 (1.22 to 1.39) in those with and without IHD, respectively. Patients with both T2DM and IHD had the highest mortality, which was further accentuated by the absence of previous revascularization (adjusted HR: 0.82 in favor of such treatment; 95% CI: 0.75 to 0.91). Propensity score adjustment did not change these results (HR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.78 to 0.96). Revascularization did not abolish the impact of T2DM, which predicted mortality in those with (HR: 1.36; 95% CI: 1.24 to 1.48) and without (HR: 1.45; 95% CI: 1.33 to 1.56) a history of revascularization. Ninety percent of HF patients with T2DM have preventable comorbidities. IHD in patients with T2DM had an especially negative influence on mortality, an impact that was beneficially influenced by previous revascularization.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 28 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 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 69 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 16%
Other 9 13%
Researcher 7 10%
Student > Postgraduate 6 9%
Student > Bachelor 5 7%
Other 12 17%
Unknown 19 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 36 52%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Chemistry 2 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 1%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 20 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 117. 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 29 March 2017.
All research outputs
#357,166
of 25,461,852 outputs
Outputs from JACC
#835
of 16,734 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,939
of 348,559 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JACC
#16
of 206 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,461,852 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,734 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 348,559 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 206 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.