1,720,980 research outputs found

    Markers of beta cell function in type 1 diabetes mellitus

    No full text
    Type 1 diabetes mellitus is a multifactorial autoimmune disease characterized by destruction of insulin producing pancreatic beta cells that results in insulin deficiency and fasting hyperglycemia. It is now well known that the clinical onset of the disease represents the end stage of an immunological process that occurs over a course of months to years. During this period the presence of autoantibodies against different islet antigens can be detected by the use of standardized assays. The rate of beta cell loss is quite variable among different individuals and at onset ketoacidosis represents still a life threatening complication of the disease. The Diabetes Control and Complication Trial (DCCT) has clearly shown that the preservation of beta cell function in type 1 diabetic subjects results in a better metabolic control and significantly reduces the risk of microvascular complications. Consequently, markers of beta cell function represent important tools to make an early diagnosis and to evaluate the impact of new therapies on the natural history of the disease. The present review will focus on clinical markers currently available (intravenous glucose tolerance test, i.v.GTT, oral glucose tolerance test, OGTT, basal and stimulated C-peptide) to assess the beta cell function in type 1 diabetes

    Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis

    Full text link
    The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
    corecore