↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Continuous glucose monitoring systems for type 1 diabetes mellitus

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2012
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 (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
policy
1 policy source
twitter
6 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
215 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
412 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Continuous glucose monitoring systems for type 1 diabetes mellitus
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd008101.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Miranda Langendam, Yoeri M Luijf, Lotty Hooft, J Hans DeVries, Aart H Mudde, Rob JPM Scholten

Abstract

Self-monitoring of blood glucose is essential to optimise glycaemic control in type 1 diabetes mellitus. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems measure interstitial fluid glucose levels to provide semi-continuous information about glucose levels, which identifies fluctuations that would not have been identified with conventional self-monitoring. Two types of CGM systems can be defined: retrospective systems and real-time systems. Real-time systems continuously provide the actual glucose concentration on a display. Currently, the use of CGM is not common practice and its reimbursement status is a point of debate in many countries.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 412 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 3 <1%
Germany 2 <1%
France 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 403 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 57 14%
Student > Bachelor 55 13%
Researcher 52 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 38 9%
Other 35 8%
Other 73 18%
Unknown 102 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 167 41%
Nursing and Health Professions 37 9%
Psychology 19 5%
Social Sciences 12 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 2%
Other 55 13%
Unknown 112 27%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 45. 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 12 June 2022.
All research outputs
#774,461
of 22,660,862 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,626
of 12,296 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,014
of 245,906 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#22
of 234 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,660,862 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 12,296 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.3. 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 245,906 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 234 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.