↓ Skip to main content

Historical facts of screening and diagnosing diabetes in pregnancy

Overview of attention for article published in Diabetology & Metabolic Syndrome, May 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
172 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
Historical facts of screening and diagnosing diabetes in pregnancy
Published in
Diabetology & Metabolic Syndrome, May 2013
DOI 10.1186/1758-5996-5-22
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carlos Antonio Negrato, Marilia Brito Gomes

Abstract

Diabetes is the most common metabolic disorder affecting pregnancy. Its prevalence seems to be growing in parallel with the epidemics of overweight and obesity. Recognizing and treating diabetes or any degree of glucose intolerance in pregnancy results in lowering maternal and fetal complications. These patients present higher risk for excessive weight gain, preeclampsia, cesarean sections, a high risk of developing type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease in the future. Infants born to these mothers are at higher risk for macrosomia and birth trauma, and after delivery, these infants have a higher risk of developing hypoglycemia, hypocalcemia, hyperbilirubinemia, respiratory distress syndrome, polycythemia and subsequent obesity and type 2 diabetes. Despite several international workshops and a lot of research there is still no unique approach to diagnose and treat diabetes in pregnancy. Who, when and how to screen and diagnose diabetes in pregnancy has been debated in the literature for so many decades and this debate seems to be endless. We present the evolution that screening and diagnosing diabetes in pregnancy has had over time. Besides many evidence of the benefits these procedures bring, health care providers still often prefer to use alternate criteria for this purpose. The myriad of maternal and fetal complications that could be avoided with an appropriate and simple screening procedure are ignored. Robust clinical trials such as the Hyperglycemia and Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes (HAPO) study have shown how harmful can even slightly altered blood glucose levels be, but it has been found a resistance in the adoption of the new criteria proposed after this and other trials by many diabetes organizations. These organizations state that these new criteria would increase the incidence of diabetes in pregnancy, would imply in longer term follow-up of these patients and would pose an economic problem; they also state that alerting too many people in order to benefit a relatively few potential diabetics would arise psychologic ill-effects. We think that health care providers should look for an uniformity in the screening and diagnosing diabetes in pregnancy based on evidence based medicine and not on specialists consensus.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 172 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 <1%
Cameroon 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 169 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 37 22%
Student > Bachelor 17 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 8%
Researcher 13 8%
Student > Postgraduate 13 8%
Other 32 19%
Unknown 46 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 73 42%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 2%
Other 21 12%
Unknown 51 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 04 June 2014.
All research outputs
#3,907,044
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Diabetology & Metabolic Syndrome
#145
of 819 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,054
of 208,430 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diabetology & Metabolic Syndrome
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 819 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 208,430 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them