| Title |
Difference in the effects of switching from Candesartan to Olmesartan or Telmisartan to Olmesartan in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes: the COTO study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Drug Design, Development and Therapy, February 2014
|
| DOI | 10.2147/dddt.s53253 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hiroyuki Daikuhara, Kensaku Fukunaga, Tomie Ohshima |
| Abstract |
This open-label controlled study compared the therapeutic efficacy of three representative angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes attending a hospital outpatient clinic. The primary measure in this study was morning home blood pressure (BP). |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Denmark | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 51 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 13% |
| Researcher | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 13% |
| Other | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 10% |
| Other | 11 | 21% |
| Unknown | 10 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 38% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 13% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 10% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 10% |
| Unknown | 11 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 March 2014.
All research outputs
#15,169,543
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#819
of 2,268 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#176,633
of 322,718 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#7
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,268 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 322,718 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 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 69% of its contemporaries.