↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

'Human' insulin versus animal insulin in people with diabetes mellitus

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2005
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 (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
11 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
39 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
167 Mendeley
Title
'Human' insulin versus animal insulin in people with diabetes mellitus
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2005
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd003816.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bernd Richter, Gudrun Neises

Abstract

Human insulin was introduced for the routine treatment of diabetes mellitus in the early 1980s without adequate comparison of efficacy to animal insulin preparations. First reports of altered hypoglycaemia awareness after transfer to human insulin made physicians and especially patients uncertain about potential adverse effects of human insulin.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 167 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Hong Kong 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Unknown 164 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 24 14%
Student > Bachelor 22 13%
Researcher 18 11%
Other 15 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 8%
Other 23 14%
Unknown 51 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 56 34%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 9 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 4%
Chemistry 6 4%
Other 25 15%
Unknown 54 32%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 21 October 2022.
All research outputs
#1,629,018
of 22,577,901 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,722
of 12,284 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,137
of 139,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#10
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,577,901 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,284 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.2. 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 139,923 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.