↓ Skip to main content

Evaluation of the relationship between HbA1c level and retina choroidal thickness in patients with gestational diabetes mellitus

Overview of attention for article published in Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia, January 2022
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
15 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
Evaluation of the relationship between HbA1c level and retina choroidal thickness in patients with gestational diabetes mellitus
Published in
Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia, January 2022
DOI 10.5935/0004-2749.20220045
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bekir Kahveci, Yıldız Dilbade Ekinci

Abstract

To investigate the effect of hemoglobin A1c level on central macular thickness and central, nasal, and temporal choroidal thickness in patients with gestational diabetes mellitus. This retrospective study included 41 patients who had been diagnosed with gestational diabetes mellitus and undergone a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test between 24 and 28 weeks of gestation. They were divided into two groups based on their hemoglobin A1c level (group 1: hemoglobin A1c <6.0% and group 2: hemoglobin A1c ≥6.0%). All patients underwent a complete ophthalmologic examination. The central macular thickness and central, nasal, and temporal choroidal thickness were measured using optical coherence tomography. Of the 3,016 pregnant women screened, 7.5% (n=228) were diagnosed with gestational diabetes mellitus during the study period and 41 of these patients were included in the study. Group 1 comprised 48 eyes from 24 patients and Group 2 consisted of 34 eyes of 17 patients. The average body mass index values were 30.8 ± 3.3 and 35.1 ± 9.0, respectively (p=0.002). The insulin use rates were 29.2% and 76.5%, respectively (p=0.000). Mean central macular thickness values were 250.8 ± 14.3 µm and 260.9 ± 18.1 µm, respectively, and the difference was significant (p=0.008). Although the body mass index and central macular thickness values were significantly higher in Group 2, there was no difference in the central, nasal, and temporal choroidal thickness between the two groups.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 2 13%
Librarian 1 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Student > Master 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Unknown 8 53%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 7%
Unknown 9 60%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 03 October 2021.
All research outputs
#16,060,096
of 25,844,183 outputs
Outputs from Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia
#135
of 451 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#262,378
of 522,043 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia
#5
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,844,183 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 451 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 522,043 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.