↓ Skip to main content

Dietary interventions for managing glucose abnormalities in cystic fibrosis: a systematic review protocol

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Reviews, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 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
Dietary interventions for managing glucose abnormalities in cystic fibrosis: a systematic review protocol
Published in
Systematic Reviews, July 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13643-018-0757-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Laura Birch, Fiona E. Lithander, Simon Langton Hewer, Katie Harriman, Julian Hamilton-Shield, Rachel Perry

Abstract

Glucose abnormalities in cystic fibrosis (CF) are common, but there is limited evidence to guide their dietary management. Progressive impaired glucose tolerance eventually leads to cystic fibrosis-related diabetes (CFRD), the most prevalent complication of CF, which is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Optimising glycaemic control improves clinical status and reduces mortality; insulin therapy is the primary means of controlling glycaemia in CFRD, but its role in managing pre-diabetes is less clear. CF dietary therapy requires a high calorie diet due to increased energy expenditure and malabsorption, but this energy-dense diet is typically high in fat and sugar, and high sugar intakes often result in hyperglycaemia in individuals who have impaired glucose handling. Current guidelines for the dietary management of glucose abnormalities in CF are based on clinical consensus rather than empirical evidence. A systematic review conducted in 2012 on the effects of low glycaemic index dietary intervention in CF concluded that there is a dearth of evidence in this area. This review will update the systematic review by Balzer et al. in 2012 and will broaden the scope of their review to include any type of dietary intervention for managing glucose abnormalities in CF. Quantitative studies of dietary interventions to manage glucose abnormalities in individuals aged over 5 years with CF and glucose abnormalities will be reviewed. No limits will be placed on language or study design. The comparator will be standard CF dietary therapy (energy dense, high-fat diet) in addition to insulin therapy for individuals with CFRD. Electronic databases will be searched for completed quantitative studies published in peer-review journals that focus on dietary interventions for managing glucose abnormalities in CF. Searches will be conducted from 2000 up to the present day to reflect the evolving improvements in CF management. No restrictions will be placed on study design or language. Duration of the dietary intervention must be a minimum of 2 months and only interventions in out-patient or community settings will be included. Studies must report on dietary intervention, glycaemic control, anthropometry and lung function. Evidence will be assessed for heterogeneity and a narrative review or meta-analysis conducted as appropriate. This systematic review will elucidate current knowledge of the effects of dietary interventions for managing glucose abnormalities in the vulnerable CF clinical population. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42018085569 www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 76 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 10 13%
Student > Master 9 12%
Student > Postgraduate 6 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Other 12 16%
Unknown 28 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 17%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Other 7 9%
Unknown 30 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 21 July 2018.
All research outputs
#5,830,887
of 23,096,849 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#995
of 2,010 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#99,438
of 329,174 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#38
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,096,849 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,010 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 329,174 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 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.