↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

An algorithm for identification and classification of individuals with type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus in a large primary care database

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Epidemiology, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
71 Mendeley
Title
An algorithm for identification and classification of individuals with type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus in a large primary care database
Published in
Clinical Epidemiology, October 2016
DOI 10.2147/clep.s113415
Pubmed ID
Authors

Manuj Sharma, Irene Petersen, Irwin Nazareth, Sonia J Coton

Abstract

Research into diabetes mellitus (DM) often requires a reproducible method for identifying and distinguishing individuals with type 1 DM (T1DM) and type 2 DM (T2DM). To develop a method to identify individuals with T1DM and T2DM using UK primary care electronic health records. Using data from The Health Improvement Network primary care database, we developed a two-step algorithm. The first algorithm step identified individuals with potential T1DM or T2DM based on diagnostic records, treatment, and clinical test results. We excluded individuals with records for rarer DM subtypes only. For individuals to be considered diabetic, they needed to have at least two records indicative of DM; one of which was required to be a diagnostic record. We then classified individuals with T1DM and T2DM using the second algorithm step. A combination of diagnostic codes, medication prescribed, age at diagnosis, and whether the case was incident or prevalent were used in this process. We internally validated this classification algorithm through comparison against an independent clinical examination of The Health Improvement Network electronic health records for a random sample of 500 DM individuals. Out of 9,161,866 individuals aged 0-99 years from 2000 to 2014, we classified 37,693 individuals with T1DM and 418,433 with T2DM, while 1,792 individuals remained unclassified. A small proportion were classified with some uncertainty (1,155 [3.1%] of all individuals with T1DM and 6,139 [1.5%] with T2DM) due to unclear health records. During validation, manual assignment of DM type based on clinical assessment of the entire electronic record and algorithmic assignment led to equivalent classification in all instances. The majority of individuals with T1DM and T2DM can be readily identified from UK primary care electronic health records. Our approach can be adapted for use in other health care settings.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Switzerland 1 1%
Unknown 70 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 15%
Researcher 10 14%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Lecturer 4 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 6%
Other 15 21%
Unknown 21 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 38%
Mathematics 4 6%
Computer Science 4 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 3%
Other 9 13%
Unknown 23 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 September 2018.
All research outputs
#6,354,664
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Epidemiology
#238
of 793 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,973
of 332,577 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Epidemiology
#9
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 793 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. 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 332,577 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.