↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
47 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.
Article details
Title
Glycemic control is an important modifiable risk factor for uveitis in patients with diabetes: A retrospective cohort study establishing clinical risk and ophthalmic disease burden
Published in
Journal of Diabetes & its Complications, March 2018
DOI 10.1016/j.jdiacomp.2018.03.008
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

To characterize the risk uveitis, scleritis or episcleritis in relation to diabetes, glycaemic control, and co-existence of retinopathy. Using the Royal College of General Practitioners Research and Surveillance Centre database, we established the prevalence of acute uveitis and scleritis or episcleritis over a six-year period among populations without(n = 889,856) and with diabetes(n = 48,584). We evaluated the impact of glycaemic control on disease risk. Regression modeling was used to identify associations, adjusting for clinical and demographic confounders. Incidence of acute uveitis was higher among patients with diabetes; Type 1 OR:2.01 (95% CI 1.18-3.41; p = 0.009), and Type 2 OR:1.23 (1.05-1.44; p = 0.01). Glycaemic control was established as an important effect modifier for uveitis risk, whereby those with poorer control suffered higher disease burden. Results confirmed a dose-response relationship such that very poor glycaemic control OR:4.72 (2.58-8.65; p < 0.001), poor control OR:1.57 (1.05-2.33; p = 0.03) and moderate control OR:1.20 (0.86-1.68; p = 0.29) were predictive of uveitis. Similar results were observed when evaluating retinopathy staging: proliferative retinopathy OR:2.42 (1.25-4.69; p = 0.01). These results were not maintained for scleritis or episcleritis. Acute uveitis is more common in patients with diabetes; at highest risk are those with type 1 disease with poor glycaemic control. Glycaemic improvements may prevent recurrence.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 47 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 13%
Researcher 5 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 4%
Student > Master 2 4%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 23 49%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 13%
Psychology 2 4%
Engineering 2 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 25 53%
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 20 July 2018.
All research outputs
#31,195,265
of 34,376,207 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Diabetes & its Complications
#1,474
of 1,643 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#338,022
of 374,993 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Diabetes & its Complications
#16
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,376,207 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 1,643 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. 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 374,993 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 17 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.