| Title |
Keeping Up with the Diabetes Technology: 2016 Endocrine Society Guidelines of Insulin Pump Therapy and Continuous Glucose Monitor Management of Diabetes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Diabetes Reports, September 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11892-017-0944-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alfonso Galderisi, Elise Schlissel, Eda Cengiz |
| Abstract |
Decades after the invention of insulin pump, diabetes management has encountered a technology revolution with the introduction of continuous glucose monitoring, sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy and closed-loop/artificial pancreas systems. In this review, we discuss the significance of the 2016 Endocrine Society Guidelines for insulin pump therapy and continuous glucose monitoring and summarize findings from relevant diabetes technology studies that were conducted after the publication of the 2016 Endocrine Society Guidelines. The 2016 Endocrine Society Guidelines have been a great resource for clinicians managing diabetes in this new era of diabetes technology. There is good body of evidence indicating that using diabetes technology systems safely tightens glycemic control while managing both type 1 and type 2 diabetes. The first-generation diabetes technology systems will evolve as we gain more experience and collaboratively work to improve them with an ultimate goal of keeping people with diabetes complication and burden-free until the cure for diabetes becomes a reality. |
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 84 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 84 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 14 | 17% |
| Researcher | 12 | 14% |
| Other | 9 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 10% |
| Other | 16 | 19% |
| Unknown | 16 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 32 | 38% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 8% |
| Engineering | 6 | 7% |
| Computer Science | 6 | 7% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 10 | 12% |
| Unknown | 19 | 23% |
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 23 June 2018.
All research outputs
#18,640,437
of 23,092,602 outputs
Outputs from Current Diabetes Reports
#783
of 1,016 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#245,311
of 319,789 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Diabetes Reports
#29
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,092,602 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,016 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.3. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% 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 319,789 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.