↓ Skip to main content

Prognostic impact of systolic blood pressure variability in people with diabetes

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 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
Prognostic impact of systolic blood pressure variability in people with diabetes
Published in
PLOS ONE, April 2018
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0194084
Pubmed ID
Authors

Katy J. L. Bell, Lamiae Azizi, Peter M. Nilsson, Andrew Hayen, Les Irwig, Carl J. Östgren, Johan Sundröm

Abstract

Blood pressure variability (BPV) has been associated with risk of cardiovascular events in observational studies, independently of mean BP levels. In states with higher autonomic imbalance, such as in diabetes, the importance of BP variability may theoretically be even greater. We aimed to investigate the incremental value of BPV for prediction of cardiovascular and all-cause mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes. We identified 9,855 patients without pre-existing cardiovascular disease who did not change BP-lowering treatment during the observation period from a Swedish primary health care cohort of patients with type 2 diabetes. BPV was summarized as the standard deviation (SD), coefficient of variation (CV), or variation independent of mean (VIM). Patients were followed for a median of 4 years and associations with cardiovascular and all-cause mortality were investigated using Cox proportional hazards models. BPV was not associated with cardiovascular specific or all-cause mortality in the total sample. In patients who were not on BP-lowering drugs during the observation period (n = 2,949), variability measures were associated with all-cause mortality: hazard ratios were 1.05, 1.04 and 1.05 for 50% increases in SD, CV and VIM, respectively, adjusted for Framingham risk score risk factors, including mean BP. However, the addition of the variability measures in this subgroup only led to very minimal improvement in discrimination, indicating they may have limited clinical usefulness (change in C-statistic ranged from 0.000-0.003 in all models). Although BPV was independently associated with all-cause mortality in diabetes patients in primary care who did not have pre-existing cardiovascular disease or BP-lowering drugs, it may be of minimal clinical usefulness above and beyond that of other routinely measured predictors, including mean BP.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 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 %
Researcher 8 20%
Student > Bachelor 6 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 10%
Student > Master 4 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 8%
Other 6 15%
Unknown 9 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 43%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Computer Science 1 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 3%
Other 6 15%
Unknown 11 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 15 April 2019.
All research outputs
#14,618,234
of 23,498,521 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#122,429
of 201,187 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#187,072
of 330,346 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#1,993
of 3,434 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,498,521 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 201,187 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.3. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 330,346 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,434 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.