↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Rapid alkaline methylene blue supravital staining for assessment of anterior segment infections

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Ophthalmology, October 2016
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 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
11 Mendeley
Title
Rapid alkaline methylene blue supravital staining for assessment of anterior segment infections
Published in
Clinical Ophthalmology, October 2016
DOI 10.2147/opth.s116616
Pubmed ID
Authors

Katsuji Kiuchi

Abstract

To present the Löffler's alkaline methylene blue technique of staining eye discharges in eyes with anterior segment infections. The Löffler's alkaline methylene blue staining method is a simple staining technique that can be used to differentiate bacterial, viral, and fungal infections. It is a cationic dye that stains cells blue because the positively charged dye is attracted to negatively charged particles such as polyphosphates, DNAs, and RNAs. Specimens collected from patients by swabbing are smeared onto microscope slides and the methylene blue solution is dropped on the slide. The slide is covered with a glass cover slip and examined under a microscope. The entire time from the collection to the viewing is about 30 seconds. Histopathological images of the conjunctival epithelial cells and neutrophils in eye discharges were dyed blue and the nuclei were stained more intensely blue. Bacterial infections consisted mainly of neutrophils, and viral infections consisted mainly of lymphocytes. Löffler's alkaline methylene blue staining can be done in about 30 seconds for diagnosis. Even though this is a one color stain, it is possible to infer the cause of the infection by detection of the absence of bacteria and/or fungi in context of the differential distribution of neutrophils and lymphocytes.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 11 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 45%
Researcher 2 18%
Unspecified 1 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 9%
Student > Master 1 9%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 1 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 18%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 18%
Unspecified 1 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 9%
Other 4 36%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 13 October 2016.
All research outputs
#7,836,237
of 12,488,808 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#712
of 1,597 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#146,299
of 265,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#27
of 68 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,488,808 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,597 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 265,499 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 68 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.