↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) versus multiple insulin injections for type 1 diabetes mellitus

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2010
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 (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
7 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
338 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
Title
Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) versus multiple insulin injections for type 1 diabetes mellitus
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2010
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd005103.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marie L Misso, Kristine J Egberts, Matthew Page, Denise O'Connor, Jonathan Shaw

Abstract

Type 1 diabetes is a metabolic disorder resulting from a defect in insulin secretion. Onset of type 1 diabetes mellitus may occur at any age and it is one of the most common chronic diseases of childhood and adolescence. Since there are no interventions known to prevent onset, it is vital that effective treatment regimes are available. Glycaemic control is maintained by replacement of insulin and may be in the form of 'conventional' insulin therapy (multiple injections per day) or continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII).

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 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 > Ph. D. Student 3 4%
Other 2 3%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 1%
Student > Master 1 1%
Student > Postgraduate 1 1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 68 89%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 7%
Sports and Recreations 1 1%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 1%
Engineering 1 1%
Unknown 68 89%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 05 April 2019.
All research outputs
#1,181,658
of 14,574,577 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,375
of 11,017 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,392
of 149,691 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#23
of 92 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,574,577 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,017 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 149,691 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 92 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.