| Title |
A core outcome set for studies evaluating the effectiveness of prepregnancy care for women with pregestational diabetes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Diabetologia, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00125-017-4277-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Aoife M. Egan, Sander Galjaard, Michael J. A. Maresh, Mary R. Loeken, Angela Napoli, Eleni Anastasiou, Eoin Noctor, Harold W. de Valk, Mireille van Poppel, Marie Todd, Valerie Smith, Declan Devane, Fidelma P. Dunne |
| Abstract |
The aim of this study was to develop a core outcome set (COS) for trials and other studies evaluating the effectiveness of prepregnancy care for women with pregestational (pre-existing) diabetes mellitus. A systematic literature review was completed to identify all outcomes reported in prior studies in this area. Key stakeholders then prioritised these outcomes using a Delphi study. The list of outcomes included in the final COS were finalised at a face-to-face consensus meeting. In total, 17 outcomes were selected and agreed on for inclusion in the final COS. These outcomes were grouped under three domains: measures of pregnancy preparation (n = 9), neonatal outcomes (n = 6) and maternal outcomes (n = 2). This study identified a COS essential for studies evaluating prepregnancy care for women with pregestational diabetes. It is advocated that all trials and other non-randomised studies and audits in this area use this COS with the aim of improving transparency and the ability to compare and combine future studies with greater ease. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 34 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Ireland | 10 | 29% |
| United Kingdom | 10 | 29% |
| Canada | 2 | 6% |
| Oman | 1 | 3% |
| Germany | 1 | 3% |
| Cabo Verde | 1 | 3% |
| Portugal | 1 | 3% |
| Spain | 1 | 3% |
| Australia | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 6 | 18% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 18 | 53% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 9 | 26% |
| Scientists | 6 | 18% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 85 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 13 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 8% |
| Other | 6 | 7% |
| Researcher | 6 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 21 | 25% |
| Unknown | 26 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 28 | 33% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 14 | 16% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 2% |
| Psychology | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Unknown | 31 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 21 May 2018.
All research outputs
#1,622,981
of 23,576,969 outputs
Outputs from Diabetologia
#896
of 5,134 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,193
of 310,867 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diabetologia
#27
of 76 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,576,969 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,134 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 310,867 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 76 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.