Cardiometabolic morbidity is a significant contributor to the poorer health outcomes experienced by people with intellectual disability (ID). Tailoring cardiometabolic monitoring tools developed for the general population to better fit the altered risk profiles and extra needs of people with ID may help to improve health outcomes. This paper describes a new cardiometabolic monitoring framework designed to address the extra needs of people with ID. The framework was adapted from a generalist guideline after a process of extensive consultation with the original authors and over 30 ID and cardiometabolic experts. In addition to standard cardiometabolic monitoring practice, the framework encourages clinicians to: anticipate and address barriers to care such as communication difficulties and fear of blood tests; account for socioeconomic and genetic factors altering baseline cardiometabolic risk; and carefully rationalize psychotropic prescription. Together with this framework, a toolkit of free cardiometabolic resources tailored for people with ID and formal and informal carers is included. The monitoring framework promotes a multidisciplinary and holistic approach to cardiometabolic care for people with ID.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 09 August 2016.
All research outputs
#8,597,823
of 32,775,379 outputs
Outputs from Australian Journal of Primary Health
#175
of 751 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,782
of 327,797 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Australian Journal of Primary Health
#6
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,775,379 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 751 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 327,797 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
