↓ Skip to main content

Change in Diabetes Prevalence and Control among New York City Adults: NYC Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys 2004–2014

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Urban Health, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
8 news outlets

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
Title
Change in Diabetes Prevalence and Control among New York City Adults: NYC Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys 2004–2014
Published in
Journal of Urban Health, July 2018
DOI 10.1007/s11524-018-0285-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lorna E. Thorpe, Rania Kanchi, Shadi Chamany, Jesica S. Rodriguez-Lopez, Claudia Chernov, Amy Freeman, Sharon E. Perlman

Abstract

National examination surveys provide trend information on diabetes prevalence, diagnoses, and control. Few localities have access to such information. Using a similar design as the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), two NYC Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (NYC HANES) were conducted over a decade, recruiting adults ≥ 20 years using household probability samples (n = 1808 in 2004; n = 1246 in 2013-2014) and physical exam survey methods benchmarked against NHANES. Participants had diagnosed diabetes if told by a health provider they had diabetes, and undiagnosed diabetes if they had no diagnosis but a fasting plasma glucose ≥ 126 mg/dl or A1C ≥ 6.5%. We found that between 2004 and 2014, total diabetes prevalence (diagnosed and undiagnosed) in NYC increased from 13.4 to 16.0% (P = 0.089). In 2013-2014, racial/ethnic disparities in diabetes burden had widened; diabetes was highest among Asians (24.6%), and prevalence was significantly lower among non-Hispanic white adults (7.7%) compared to that among other racial/ethnic groups (P < 0.001). Among adults with diabetes, the proportion of cases diagnosed increased from 68.3 to 77.3% (P = 0.234), and diagnosed cases with very poor control (A1C > 9%), decreased from 26.9 to 18.0% (P = 0.269), though both were non-significant. While local racial/ethnic disparities in diabetes prevalence persist, findings suggest modest improvements in diabetes diagnosis and management.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 9%
Student > Bachelor 2 9%
Other 1 4%
Lecturer 1 4%
Other 4 17%
Unknown 10 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 4 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 13%
Social Sciences 2 9%
Mathematics 1 4%
Unspecified 1 4%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 10 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 57. 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 10 July 2018.
All research outputs
#637,018
of 23,096,849 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Urban Health
#98
of 1,296 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,282
of 326,642 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Urban Health
#3
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,096,849 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,296 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 326,642 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
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 has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.