↓ Skip to main content

Association Between Type 2 Diabetes and All-Cause Hospitalization and Mortality in the UK General Heart Failure Population Stratification by Diabetic Glycemic Control and Medication Intensification

Overview of attention for article published in JACC: Heart Failure, October 2017
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 (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
twitter
62 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
61 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 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
Association Between Type 2 Diabetes and All-Cause Hospitalization and Mortality in the UK General Heart Failure Population Stratification by Diabetic Glycemic Control and Medication Intensification
Published in
JACC: Heart Failure, October 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.jchf.2017.08.020
Pubmed ID
Authors

Claire A. Lawson, Peter W. Jones, Lucy Teece, Sandra B. Dunbar, Petar M. Seferovic, Kamlesh Khunti, Mamas Mamas, Umesh T. Kadam

Abstract

This study sought to investigate in the general heart failure (HF) population, whether the associations between type 2 diabetes (T2D) and risk of hospitalization and death, are modified by changing glycemic or drug treatment intensity. In the general HF population, T2D confers a higher risk of poor outcomes, but whether this risk is modified by the diabetes status is unknown. A nested case-control study in an incident HF database cohort (2002 to 2014) comparing patients with T2D with those without, for risk of all-cause first hospitalization and death. T2D was stratified by categories of glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) or drug treatments measured 6 months before hospitalization and 1 year before death and compared with the HF group without T2D. In HF, T2D was associated with risk of first hospitalization (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 1.29; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.24 to 1.34) and mortality (aOR: 1.24; 95% CI: 1.29 to 1.40). Stratification of T2D by HbA1c levels, compared with the reference HF group without T2D, showed U-shaped associations with both outcomes. Highest risk categories were HbA1c >9.5% (hospitalization, aOR: 1.75; 95% CI: 1.52 to 2.02; mortality, aOR: 1.30; 95% CI: 1.24 to 1.47) and <5.5% (hospitalization, aOR: 1.42; 95% CI: 1.12 to 1.80; mortality, aOR: 1.29; 95% CI: 1.10 to 1.51, respectively). T2D group with change in HbA1c of >1% decrease was associated with hospitalization (aOR: 1.33; 95% CI: 1.18 to 1.49) and mortality (aOR: 1.36; 95% CI: 1.24 to 1.48). T2D drug group associations with hospitalization were no medication (aOR: 1.12; 95% CI: 1.04 to 1.19), oral antihyperglycemic only (aOR: 1.34; 95% CI: 1.27 to 1.41), oral antihyperglycemic+insulin (aOR: 1.36; 95% CI: 1.21 to 1.52), and insulin only (aOR: 1.61; 95% CI: 1.43 to 1.81); and with mortality the same were 1.31 (95% CI: 1.23 to 1.39), 1.16 (95% CI: 1.11 to 1.22), 1.19 (95% CI: 1.06 to 1.34), and 1.43 (95% CI: 1.31 to 1.57), respectively. The T2D group with reducing drug treatments were associated with hospitalization (aOR: 2.13; 95% CI: 1.68 to 2.69) and mortality (aOR: 2.09; 95% CI: 1.81 to 2.41). In the general HF population, T2D stratified by glycemic control and drug treatments showed differential risk associations. Routine measures of dynamic diabetes status provide important prognostic indication of poor outcomes in HF.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 62 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 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 53 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 7 13%
Student > Master 5 9%
Student > Postgraduate 5 9%
Researcher 5 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 8%
Other 9 17%
Unknown 18 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 43%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 21 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 61. 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 19 April 2018.
All research outputs
#705,482
of 25,446,666 outputs
Outputs from JACC: Heart Failure
#198
of 1,591 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,865
of 333,851 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JACC: Heart Failure
#5
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,446,666 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,591 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 333,851 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.