| Title |
Skin Deep: Enhanced Variable May Help Explain Racial Disparities in Type 2 Diabetes and Prediabetes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Diabetes Therapy, June 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13300-017-0278-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Celia C. Lo, Joanna Lara, Tyrone C. Cheng |
| Abstract |
The study refined definitions of type 2 diabetes and prediabetes (Pre-/T2D) via its four-category outcome variable. Respondents were identified as Pre-/T2D on the basis of (a) doctor's diagnosis only (i.e., managed Pre-/T2D); (b) biomarker only (i.e., undiagnosed Pre-/T2D); or (c) both diagnosis and biomarker (i.e., unmanaged Pre-/T2D). The reference was Pre-/T2D not indicated. We linked the outcome to social structural and social support factors, health care-related factors, mental disorder, and lifestyle variables, for each racial/ethnic group. We used the 2011-2012 and 2013-2014 National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys to measure the four-category outcome and examine race/ethnicity's role in explaining the outcome. We found Pre-/T2D to be associated with age, BMI, physical activity, income, education, receiving health services, and other factors. A moderating role for race/ethnicity was also confirmed. The racial disparities observed in our three main categories generally resulted from high levels of undiagnosed Pre-/T2D and high levels of diagnosed but unmanaged Pre-T2D. Race/ethnicity's moderating role generally indicated that, through the factors BMI, age, and receiving health services, minority status (with its attendant disadvantages) could facilitate undiagnosed Pre-/T2D as well as Pre-/T2D indicated concurrently by diagnosis and biomarker. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Argentina | 1 | 20% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 20% |
| United States | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 40% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 40% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 40 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 13% |
| Researcher | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 13% |
| Unknown | 14 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 20% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 8% |
| Psychology | 3 | 8% |
| Sports and Recreations | 2 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 15% |
| Unknown | 17 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 July 2017.
All research outputs
#12,983,076
of 22,981,247 outputs
Outputs from Diabetes Therapy
#375
of 1,036 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#150,301
of 317,509 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diabetes Therapy
#9
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,981,247 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,036 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 317,509 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 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 62% of its contemporaries.