| Title |
Treating the Most Vulnerable and Costly in Diabetes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Diabetes Reports, April 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11892-015-0606-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
David V. Wagner, Maggie Stoeckel, Megan E. Tudor, Michael A. Harris |
| Abstract |
Diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) is associated with negative health outcomes and high costs for patients, families, and communities. Interventions developed to effectively reduce DKA and related costs should target the multiple risk factors associated with DKA and adherence difficulties. Certain demographic, psychological, and family factors are associated with increased risk for adherence problems and DKA. Individuals with a combination of risk factors (e.g., mental health problems, low socioeconomic status, high family conflict) may be particularly vulnerable to DKA. Although several different interventions have demonstrated promise in improving adherence and/or decreasing the risk of DKA, the generalizability of treatment results to those individuals most vulnerable to DKA is limited. Approaches which include multiple evidence-based components of care, are flexible in treatment delivery (e.g., home- and community-based, utilize technology), and target the multiple risk factors across relevant systems (e.g., individual, family, school, medical) are warranted to effectively reduce DKA in vulnerable populations. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 79 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 13 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 14% |
| Other | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 9% |
| Other | 14 | 18% |
| Unknown | 21 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 28% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 11% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 6% |
| Psychology | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 9 | 11% |
| Unknown | 25 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 30 December 2015.
All research outputs
#12,923,613
of 22,803,211 outputs
Outputs from Current Diabetes Reports
#514
of 1,006 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#108,332
of 237,921 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Diabetes Reports
#5
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,803,211 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,006 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 237,921 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 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 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 72% of its contemporaries.