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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Computer‐assisted versus oral‐and‐written dietary history taking for diabetes mellitus
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd008488.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Igor Wei, Yannis Pappas, Josip Car, Aziz Sheikh, Azeem Majeed |
| Abstract |
Diabetes is a chronic illness characterised by insulin resistance or deficiency, resulting in elevated glycosylated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels. Diet and adherence to dietary advice is associated with lower HbA1c levels and control of disease. Dietary history may be an effective clinical tool for diabetes management and has traditionally been taken by oral-and-written methods, although it can also be collected using computer-assisted history taking systems (CAHTS). Although CAHTS were first described in the 1960s, there remains uncertainty about the impact of these methods on dietary history collection, clinical care and patient outcomes such as quality of life. |
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 235 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Luxembourg | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 230 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 49 | 21% |
| Researcher | 30 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 24 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 18 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 16 | 7% |
| Other | 40 | 17% |
| Unknown | 58 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 79 | 34% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 19 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 17 | 7% |
| Psychology | 13 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 3% |
| Other | 28 | 12% |
| Unknown | 72 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 08 June 2022.
All research outputs
#8,296,727
of 25,457,297 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8,927
of 11,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,959
of 247,349 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#127
of 207 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,297 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,499 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 40.0. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 247,349 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 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 207 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.