↓ Skip to main content

Blood pressure targets for hypertension in people with diabetes mellitus

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
46 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
97 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
269 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
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
Blood pressure targets for hypertension in people with diabetes mellitus
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd008277.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jose Agustin Arguedas, Viriam Leiva, James M Wright

Abstract

When treating elevated blood pressure (BP), doctors often want to know what blood pressure target they should try to achieve. The standard blood pressure target in clinical practice for some time has been less than 140 - 160/90 - 100 mmHg for the general population of people with elevated blood pressure. Several clinical guidelines published in recent years have recommended lower targets (less than 130/80 mmHg) for people with diabetes mellitus. It is not known whether attempting to achieve targets lower than the standard target reduces mortality and morbidity in those with elevated blood pressure and diabetes.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 46 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 269 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 4 1%
United States 2 <1%
India 1 <1%
Peru 1 <1%
Tanzania, United Republic of 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Unknown 259 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 51 19%
Researcher 34 13%
Student > Bachelor 33 12%
Student > Master 33 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 7%
Other 67 25%
Unknown 33 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 157 58%
Nursing and Health Professions 25 9%
Social Sciences 5 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 2%
Other 28 10%
Unknown 44 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 39. 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 23 October 2016.
All research outputs
#587,023
of 16,083,796 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,542
of 11,392 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,887
of 189,177 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#17
of 105 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,083,796 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,392 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 189,177 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 105 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.