| Title |
Fracture risk in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and possible risk factors: a systematic review and meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2147/tcrm.s131945 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ardeshir Moayeri, Mahmoud Mohamadpour, Seyedeh Fatemeh Mousavi, Ehsan Shirzadpour, Safoura Mohamadpour, Mansour Amraei |
| Abstract |
Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) have an increased risk of bone fractures. A variable increase in fracture risk has been reported depending on skeletal site, diabetes duration, study design, insulin use, and so on. The present meta-analysis aimed to investigate the association between T2DM with fracture risk and possible risk factors. Different databases including PubMed, Institute for Scientific Information, and Scopus were searched up to May 2016. All epidemiologic studies on the association between T2DM and fracture risk were included. The relevant data obtained from these papers were analyzed by a random effects model and publication bias was assessed by funnel plot. All analyses were done by R software (version 3.2.1) and STATA (version 11.1). Thirty eligible studies were selected for the meta-analysis. We found a statistically significant positive association between T2DM and hip, vertebral, or foot fractures and no association between T2DM and wrist, proximal humerus, or ankle fractures. Overall, T2DM was associated with an increased risk of any fracture (summary relative risk =1.05, 95% confidence interval: 1.04, 1.06) and increased with age, duration of diabetes, and insulin therapy. Our findings strongly support an association between T2DM and increased risk of overall fracture. These findings emphasize the need for fracture prevention strategies in patients with diabetes. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 137 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 137 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 23 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 15 | 11% |
| Researcher | 12 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 7% |
| Other | 20 | 15% |
| Unknown | 46 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 44 | 32% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 11 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 8% |
| Engineering | 5 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 4% |
| Other | 12 | 9% |
| Unknown | 49 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 19 October 2022.
All research outputs
#3,623,019
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#177
of 1,323 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,427
of 323,961 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#3
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,323 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. 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 323,961 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.