↓ Skip to main content

Towards a Physiological Prandial Insulin Profile: Enhancement of Subcutaneously Injected Prandial Insulin Using Local Warming Devices

Overview of attention for article published in Diabetes Therapy, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 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
Towards a Physiological Prandial Insulin Profile: Enhancement of Subcutaneously Injected Prandial Insulin Using Local Warming Devices
Published in
Diabetes Therapy, September 2015
DOI 10.1007/s13300-015-0125-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ahmed H. El-Laboudi, Nick Oliver

Abstract

The need to develop an insulin delivery system that can closely mimic physiologically induced changes in prandial insulin release has been a major research target since the discovery of insulin. The challenges facing existing insulin delivery systems, related to relatively slow pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, have been further highlighted by rapid advances in diabetes technology and progress in artificial pancreas research. Despite the growing interest in alternative routes of insulin administration, the subcutaneous route remains-at least for now-the preferred route for insulin administration. In this article, we review efforts aimed at developing subcutaneously injected ultrafast-acting insulin and measures aimed at enhancing insulin absorption, focusing on local warming devices.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 6%
Unknown 16 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 4 24%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 18%
Student > Bachelor 2 12%
Student > Master 1 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 6%
Other 2 12%
Unknown 4 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 53%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 6%
Energy 1 6%
Engineering 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 10 September 2015.
All research outputs
#7,155,348
of 22,826,360 outputs
Outputs from Diabetes Therapy
#296
of 1,021 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,185
of 267,081 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diabetes Therapy
#8
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,826,360 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,021 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. 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 267,081 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.