↓ Skip to main content

Trends in cardiovascular risk factors among U.S. men and women with and without diabetes, 1988–2014

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
73 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
Trends in cardiovascular risk factors among U.S. men and women with and without diabetes, 1988–2014
Published in
BMC Public Health, November 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12889-017-4921-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xingxing Sun, Tingting Du

Abstract

Studies evidenced that reduction in cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality in diabetic patients can be attributed to improvements in major CVD risk factors and evidence-based treatments. Furthermore, studies showed that the relative risk of CVD mortality associated with diabetes compared with non-diabetes is stronger in women than in men. Hence, we aimed to examine trends in CVD risk factors and intervention measures by sex and diabetic status. Analysis of 5 distinct cross-sectional National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys, 1988-1994, 1999-2002, 2003-2006, 2007-2010, and 2010-2014. Since detailed information on nontraditional risk factors such as sleep apnea was not available in each NHANES survey, traditional CVD risk factors including obesity, hypertension, and dyslipidemia were assessed in the study. To assess whether changes throughout the 27-year period differed by diabetes status, a logistic regression analysis was utilized to examine potential interaction effects between survey and diabetes. The similar process was repeated for sex. Means of all risk factors except body mass index and waist circumference decreased and the prevalence of antihypertensive and lipid-lowering medication use increased over time among diabetic and non-diabetic men and women. For both men and women, survey × diabetes status interaction terms for changes in HDL-cholesterol and triglyceride levels were not statistically significant, while the prevalence of antihypertensive and lipid-lowering medication use increased more in diabetic than in non-diabetic persons (all P < 0.001). For women, survey × diabetes status interaction terms indicated that compared with the first survey, total cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol, and non-HDL-cholesterol fallen more in diabetic than in non-diabetic persons (all P < 0.001). In the diabetic state, men experienced similar changes in means of all CVD risk factors and the prevalence of antihypertensive and lipid-lowering medication use as women (all P for interactions between survey and sex were >0.01). The major traditional CVD risk factors in diabetic men decreased to the same extent that they did for non-diabetic men. The magnitude of changes in the favorable trends in diabetic women was of similar or greater compared with those among non-diabetic women. Diabetic women had as good an improvement in CVD risk factors as diabetic men.

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 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 73 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 8 11%
Student > Master 8 11%
Student > Bachelor 7 10%
Researcher 7 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Other 12 16%
Unknown 26 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 18%
Unspecified 2 3%
Materials Science 2 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 3%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 31 42%
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 22 March 2018.
All research outputs
#14,959,314
of 23,008,860 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#10,993
of 14,991 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#251,117
of 437,841 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#124
of 169 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,008,860 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,991 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 437,841 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 169 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.