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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Complementary and alternative medicine in diabetes (CALMIND) – a prospective study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Complementary and Integrative Medicine, January 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1515/jcim-2014-0038 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Aaron C. Tan, Jenson C.S. Mak |
| Abstract |
Abstract Background: This study aims to further elucidate the demographic and diabetes characteristics of diabetic patients in Australia who use complementary and alternative medicines (CAM). Methods: This was a prospective, cross-sectional questionnaire-based study of 149 patients with diabetes attending a general endocrine clinic in a tertiary referral hospital in Sydney, Australia. Results: Thirty-seven patients (25%) stated they had used CAM therapies within the past 5 years. Vitamins (53%) were the most common CAM therapy used. A greater number of CAM nonusers reported calf pain whilst walking (21% vs. 9%, p=0.051), and HbA1c values were lower for CAM nonusers (7.7% vs. 8.1%, p=0.057). Amongst CAM users, a majority of patients (85%) did not consult with their specialist or general practitioner prior to starting CAM therapy. Conclusions: With the increasing burden of diabetes, health practitioners will need to be more vigilant and understanding of the potential impact of CAM use on diabetes management. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 20 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 14% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 10% |
| Researcher | 2 | 10% |
| Other | 6 | 29% |
| Unknown | 2 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 24% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 19% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 10% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 19% |
| Unknown | 4 | 19% |
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 18 January 2015.
All research outputs
#16,801,619
of 24,712,008 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Complementary and Integrative Medicine
#187
of 355 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#219,831
of 362,051 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Complementary and Integrative Medicine
#11
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,712,008 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 355 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.1. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 362,051 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.