| Title |
Hormonal versus non‐hormonal contraceptives in women with diabetes mellitus type 1 and 2
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd003990.pub4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jantien Visser, Marieke Snel, Huib AAM Van Vliet |
| Abstract |
Adequate contraceptive advice is important in both women with diabetes mellitus type 1 and type 2 to reduce the risk of maternal and infant morbidity and mortality in unplanned pregnancies. A wide variety of contraceptives are available for these women. However, hormonal contraceptives might influence carbohydrate and lipid metabolism and increase micro- and macrovascular complications, so caution in selecting a contraceptive method is required. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 3 | 60% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 40% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 272 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 269 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 37 | 14% |
| Researcher | 33 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 29 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 21 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 16 | 6% |
| Other | 64 | 24% |
| Unknown | 72 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 101 | 37% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 25 | 9% |
| Unspecified | 16 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 11 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 2% |
| Other | 37 | 14% |
| Unknown | 76 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 08 January 2019.
All research outputs
#5,402,872
of 25,457,297 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,344
of 11,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,967
of 210,450 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#123
of 201 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,297 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,499 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 40.0. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 210,450 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 201 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.