↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Evaluation of the progression of visual field damage in patients suffering from early manifest glaucoma

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Ophthalmology, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (64th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
10 Mendeley
Title
Evaluation of the progression of visual field damage in patients suffering from early manifest glaucoma
Published in
Clinical Ophthalmology, August 2016
DOI 10.2147/opth.s113995
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrea Perdicchi, Solmaz Abdolrahimzadeh, Alessandro Cutini, Angela Ciarnella, Gian Luca Scuderi

Abstract

This retrospective study aimed to determine how often a perimetric examination should be carried out in order to identify visual field (VF) changes in patients with relatively early manifestation glaucoma. Patients included had a relatively recent manifestation of primary open-angle glaucoma. Patients with a minimum follow-up of 5 years and a minimum of seven VF tests were included. Statistical analysis was performed to verify the trend of variations in mean defect (MD) over time (PeriData). The results were subjected to a t-test for a comparative analysis of progression of VF changes over time. The annual rate of progression provided by PeriData considering all the VFs analyzed was compared with that obtained on half of the VF examinations during the same follow-up period. An analysis of the MD trend over time was also carried out in relationship to the number of VF tests done and by dividing the sample into a high-frequency group (more than eight VFs) and a low-frequency group (fewer than eight VFs) in the follow-up period. A total of 96 eyes of 96 patients were included, and overall 846 VFs were examined. The paired t-test performed comparing the MD index of all the VFs against half of them did not show statistical significance (P=0.537). The high-frequency group comprised 39 eyes (average VF 11.05±1.91, average time interval 0.76 years) while the low-frequency group comprised 57 eyes (average VF 6.95±0.6, average time interval 1.21 years). The analysis of the MD trend in the high-frequency patients showed significance (P=0.017); the low-frequency group did not show statistical significance (P=0.08). The number of VFs in a determined time interval was not significant. However, a greater frequency of tests provides a predictive evaluation of the rate of progression of early manifestation open-angle glaucoma.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 10 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 2 20%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 10%
Researcher 1 10%
Student > Bachelor 1 10%
Unknown 5 50%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 30%
Computer Science 1 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 10%
Unknown 5 50%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 03 September 2016.
All research outputs
#8,426,836
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#808
of 3,712 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#135,866
of 381,036 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#20
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,712 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 381,036 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 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 86 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.