↓ Skip to main content

Targeting intensive glycaemic control versus targeting conventional glycaemic control for type 2 diabetes mellitus

Overview of attention for article published in this source, November 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
2 blogs
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
31 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
211 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
216 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Targeting intensive glycaemic control versus targeting conventional glycaemic control for type 2 diabetes mellitus
Published by
John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, November 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd008143.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hemmingsen, Bianca, Lund, Søren S, Gluud, Christian, Vaag, Allan, Almdal, Thomas P, Wetterslev, Jørn

Abstract

Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) have an increased risk of cardiovascular disease and mortality compared to the background population. Observational studies report an association between reduced blood glucose and reduced risk of both micro- and macrovascular complications in patients with T2D. Our previous systematic review of intensive glycaemic control versus conventional glycaemic control was based on 20 randomised clinical trials that randomised 29 ,986 participants with T2D. We now report our updated review.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 31 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 216 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 2 <1%
Tanzania, United Republic of 1 <1%
Mozambique 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Unknown 207 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 36 17%
Student > Master 25 12%
Student > Bachelor 25 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 7%
Other 55 25%
Unknown 43 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 113 52%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 3%
Other 21 10%
Unknown 51 24%