| Title |
Defining outcomes for beta cell replacement therapy: a work in progress
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Diabetologia, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00125-018-4588-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lorenzo Piemonti, Eelco J. P. de Koning, Thierry Berney, Jon S. Odorico, James F. Markmann, Peter G. Stock, Michael R. Rickels |
| Abstract |
Defined outcomes for beta cell replacement therapy in the treatment of diabetes are critically needed. Progress towards the clinical acceptance of pancreas and islet transplantation has been hampered by the lack of clear definitions of functional and efficacy outcomes, as well as a lack of consistently applied glycaemic control metrics, together with poor alignment with the field of artificial insulin delivery/artificial pancreas development. To address this problem, the International Pancreas & Islet Transplant Association (IPITA) collaborated with the European Pancreas and Islet Transplant Association (EPITA) to develop a consensus for a joint statement on the definition of function and failure of beta cell replacement therapies, which is summarised in this commentary. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 40% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 26 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 12% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 3 | 12% |
| Unknown | 5 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 35% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 23% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 6 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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
#7,447,479
of 23,028,364 outputs
Outputs from Diabetologia
#2,861
of 5,090 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#130,887
of 331,981 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diabetologia
#57
of 67 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,028,364 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,090 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.7. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 331,981 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 60% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 67 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.