↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Integrated insulin pump therapy with continuous glucose monitoring for improved adherence: technology update

Overview of attention for article published in Patient preference and adherence, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Readers on

mendeley
62 Mendeley
Title
Integrated insulin pump therapy with continuous glucose monitoring for improved adherence: technology update
Published in
Patient preference and adherence, September 2015
DOI 10.2147/ppa.s69482
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrea Tumminia, Laura Sciacca, Lucia Frittitta, Sebastiano Squatrito, Riccardo Vigneri, Rosario Le Moli, Letizia Tomaselli

Abstract

Insulin pump therapy combined with real-time continuous glucose monitoring, known as sensor-augmented pump (SAP) therapy, has been shown to improve metabolic control and to reduce the rate of hypoglycemia in adults with type 1 diabetes compared to multiple daily injections or standard continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion. Glycemic variability is also reduced in patients on SAP therapy. This approach allows patients to monitor their glucose levels being informed of glycemic concentration and trend. Trained diabetic patients, therefore, can appropriately modify insulin infusion and/or carbohydrate intake in order to prevent hypo- or hyperglycemia. For these reasons, SAP therapy is now considered the gold standard for type 1 diabetes treatment. To be clinically effective, however, devices and techniques using advanced technology should not only have the potential to theoretically ameliorate metabolic control, but also be well accepted by patients in terms of satisfaction and health-related quality of life, because these factors will improve treatment adherence and consequently overall outcome. SAP therapy is generally well tolerated by patients; however, many clinical trials have identified significant noncompliance in the use of this device, most notably in the pediatric and adolescent populations. In this review we aim to analyze the main reasons for good or poor adherence to SAP therapy and to provide useful tips in order to fully benefit from this kind of novel therapeutic approach.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
China 1 2%
Unknown 61 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 16%
Researcher 8 13%
Student > Master 8 13%
Student > Bachelor 8 13%
Professor 3 5%
Other 11 18%
Unknown 14 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 13%
Psychology 5 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Engineering 3 5%
Other 10 16%
Unknown 16 26%
Attention Score in Context

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 09 September 2015.
All research outputs
#15,962,021
of 25,257,066 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#915
of 1,753 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#145,337
of 273,445 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#31
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,257,066 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,753 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 273,445 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.