↓ Skip to main content

Cardiac dysfunction in type II diabetes: a bittersweet, weighty problem, or both?

Overview of attention for article published in Acta Diabetologica, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 Mendeley
Title
Cardiac dysfunction in type II diabetes: a bittersweet, weighty problem, or both?
Published in
Acta Diabetologica, October 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00592-016-0911-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Melissa Leung, Vincent W. Wong, Ertugrul Durmush, Victoria Phan, Mikey Xie, Dominic Y. Leung

Abstract

Weight loss in obese patients leads to improved left ventricular (LV) function. It is unclear whether improving glycaemic control has additional benefits to weight loss alone in patients with type 2 diabetes, or if benefits of weight loss are mediated through improving glycaemic control. This case-control study examined the incremental impact of these approaches on LV function. Three groups of age, gender, and baseline HbA1c-matched patients with type 2 diabetes and suboptimal glycaemic control were followed-up for 12 months. Group 1 patients did not improve HbA1c ≥ 1 % (10.9 mmol/mol) or lose weight. Group 2 improved HbA1c ≥ 1 % but did not lose weight. Group 3 improved HbA1c ≥ 1 % (10.9 mmol/mol) and lost weight. All patients underwent transthoracic echocardiogram at baseline and at follow-up. At baseline, three groups were comparable in all clinical and metabolic parameters except Group 3 had highest body mass index. The three groups had similar echocardiographic parameters except Group 3 had the worst LV systolic function [global longitudinal strain (GLS)]. At follow-up, LV ejection fraction and diastolic function improved with a reduction in filling pressures in Group 2 and more so in Group 3. LV filling pressures in Group 1 increased. There was a significant improvement in GLS in Group 2 and more so in Group 3. Despite GLS being the worst in Group 3 at baseline, this was comparable between Groups 2 and 3 at follow-up. In overweight patients with type 2 diabetes, weight loss and improved glycaemic control had additive beneficial effects on improving LV systolic and diastolic function.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 50 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 8 16%
Student > Master 8 16%
Student > Postgraduate 7 14%
Researcher 5 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 6%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 14 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 40%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Linguistics 1 2%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 16 32%
Attention Score in Context

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 05 February 2017.
All research outputs
#15,390,684
of 22,896,955 outputs
Outputs from Acta Diabetologica
#519
of 900 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#205,341
of 324,346 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Acta Diabetologica
#10
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,896,955 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 900 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 324,346 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 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.