↓ Skip to main content

Specific use of CSII during enteral nocturnal nutrition in a child with type 1 diabetes, Hashimoto's thyroiditis, and Down syndrome

Overview of attention for article published in Archives of Endocrinology and Metabolism, July 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 Mendeley
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
Specific use of CSII during enteral nocturnal nutrition in a child with type 1 diabetes, Hashimoto's thyroiditis, and Down syndrome
Published in
Archives of Endocrinology and Metabolism, July 2013
DOI 10.1590/s0004-27302013000500009
Pubmed ID
Authors

Barbara Piccini, Sonia Toni, Lorenzo Lenzi, Federica Barni, Monica Guasti, Fina Belli, Maurizio de Martino

Abstract

The management of insulin therapy in diabetic patients who have comorbidities that involve nutritional aspects, is a major challenge for diabetes care teams. In diabetic patients with compromised nutritional status, artificial nutrition, both enteral or parenteral, may help in the treatment of chronic and acute diseases, leading to better and faster recover of the health status but, if not adequately associated with insulin therapy, it may negatively affect blood glucose levels and lead to poorer metabolic control. In particular, evidence-based recommendations for the treatment of diabetic patients during enteral nutrition therapy are not currently available and, therefore, medical practices are often based on case reports, rather than outcomes of research. We report our experience with a diabetic patient receiving nocturnal enteral feeding due to comorbidities and malnutrition, who was followed up at our centre and precociously treated with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion after the onset of type 1 diabetes. There is great need for adequately powered randomized controlled trials to provide scientific evidence for the insulin treatment of diabetic patients undergoing enteral feeding.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 1 6%
Unknown 15 94%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 1 6%
Unknown 15 94%
Attention Score in Context

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 31 July 2013.
All research outputs
#22,759,452
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Endocrinology and Metabolism
#648
of 800 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#187,075
of 209,986 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Endocrinology and Metabolism
#13
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 800 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 209,986 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.