↓ Skip to main content

Clinical Management of Women with Monogenic Diabetes During Pregnancy

Overview of attention for article published in Current Diabetes Reports, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
44 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
62 Mendeley
Title
Clinical Management of Women with Monogenic Diabetes During Pregnancy
Published in
Current Diabetes Reports, February 2018
DOI 10.1007/s11892-018-0982-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Laura T. Dickens, Rochelle N. Naylor

Abstract

Monogenic diabetes accounts for 1-2% of all diabetes cases, but is frequently misdiagnosed as type 1, type 2, or gestational diabetes. Accurate genetic diagnosis directs management, such as no pharmacologic treatment for GCK-MODY, low-dose sulfonylureas for HNF1A-MODY and HNF4A-MODY, and high-dose sulfonylureas for KATPchannel-related diabetes. While diabetes treatment is defined for the most common causes of monogenic diabetes, pregnancy poses a challenge to management. Here, we discuss the key issues in pregnancy affected by monogenic diabetes. General recommendations for pregnancy affected by GCK-MODY determine need for maternal insulin treatment based on fetal mutation status. However, a recent study suggests macrosomia and miscarriage rates may be increased with this strategy. Recent demonstration of transplacental transfer of sulfonylureas also raises questions as to when insulin should be initiated in sulfonylurea-responsive forms of monogenic diabetes. Pregnancy represents a challenge in management of monogenic diabetes, where factors of maternal glycemic control, fetal mutation status, and transplacental transfer of medication must all be taken into consideration. Guidelines for pregnancy affected by monogenic diabetes will benefit from large, prospective studies to better define the need for and timing of initiation of insulin treatment.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 62 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 13%
Student > Bachelor 6 10%
Other 5 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 16 26%
Unknown 18 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 34%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 6%
Unspecified 2 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 3%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 22 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 11 December 2019.
All research outputs
#7,000,650
of 25,732,188 outputs
Outputs from Current Diabetes Reports
#344
of 1,058 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#139,219
of 472,772 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Diabetes Reports
#6
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,732,188 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,058 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 472,772 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 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 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 70% of its contemporaries.