↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Blood pressure targets for hypertension in people with diabetes mellitus

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
46 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
108 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
296 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
Title
Blood pressure targets for hypertension in people with diabetes mellitus
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd008277.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jose Agustin Arguedas, Viriam Leiva, James M Wright

Abstract

When treating elevated blood pressure (BP), doctors often want to know what blood pressure target they should try to achieve. The standard blood pressure target in clinical practice for some time has been less than 140 - 160/90 - 100 mmHg for the general population of people with elevated blood pressure. Several clinical guidelines published in recent years have recommended lower targets (less than 130/80 mmHg) for people with diabetes mellitus. It is not known whether attempting to achieve targets lower than the standard target reduces mortality and morbidity in those with elevated blood pressure and diabetes.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 46 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 296 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 4 1%
United States 2 <1%
India 1 <1%
Peru 1 <1%
Tanzania, United Republic of 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Unknown 286 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 50 17%
Student > Bachelor 36 12%
Student > Master 34 11%
Researcher 34 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 7%
Other 70 24%
Unknown 52 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 160 54%
Nursing and Health Professions 25 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 8 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 2%
Other 30 10%
Unknown 62 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 41. 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 15 August 2019.
All research outputs
#656,273
of 18,434,942 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,576
of 11,832 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,866
of 198,341 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#15
of 103 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,434,942 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,832 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 198,341 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 103 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.