↓ 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 (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
36 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
8 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
122 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
360 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.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 36 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 360 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%
Colombia 1 <1%
Peru 1 <1%
Tanzania, United Republic of 1 <1%
Unknown 350 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 51 14%
Student > Master 40 11%
Researcher 37 10%
Student > Bachelor 36 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 7%
Other 80 22%
Unknown 91 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 168 47%
Nursing and Health Professions 32 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 2%
Other 35 10%
Unknown 103 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 40. 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 20 June 2024.
All research outputs
#1,073,789
of 26,176,714 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,029
of 13,191 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,383
of 227,311 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#39
of 222 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,176,714 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,191 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 227,311 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 222 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.