| Title |
Hormone replacement therapy for women with type 1 diabetes mellitus
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd008613.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Liz Mackay, Lynn Kilbride, Karen A Adamson, John Chisholm |
| Abstract |
There is conflicting information about the impact of the menopause on glycaemic control amongst women with type 1 diabetes. Some menopausal women with type 1 diabetes are treated with hormone replacement therapy (HRT) but the effects of this treatment have, to date, not been established. |
Twitter Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 25% |
| United States | 1 | 13% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 4 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 63% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 25% |
| Scientists | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 233 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 230 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 36 | 15% |
| Researcher | 31 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 28 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 6% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 13 | 6% |
| Other | 51 | 22% |
| Unknown | 59 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 76 | 33% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 34 | 15% |
| Social Sciences | 12 | 5% |
| Psychology | 9 | 4% |
| Unspecified | 7 | 3% |
| Other | 34 | 15% |
| Unknown | 61 | 26% |
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 13 April 2021.
All research outputs
#4,759,523
of 23,509,982 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,262
of 12,735 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,346
of 199,159 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#175
of 301 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,509,982 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,735 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.0. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 199,159 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 301 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.