| Title |
Single flash electroretinograms of mature cataractous and fellow eyes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Ophthalmology, October 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/opth.s118677 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yasuyuki Yamauchi, Jun-ichi Mochizuki, Akito Hirakata, Shigekazu Uda |
| Abstract |
It is generally stated that opacities of the ocular media, including senile cataract, have little effect on the electrical responses of the retina. However, lower amplitudes and longer implicit times are sometimes observed in electroretinograms (ERGs) of patients with mature cataract. Single flash ERGs of mature cataractous eyes with decimal visual acuity less than 0.1 were compared with those of the fellow eyes with decimal visual acuity better than 0.5, in 105 senile cataract patients. The mean amplitudes and implicit times of ERG a-waves were, respectively, 323.6±95.8 μV and 14.7±3.5 ms in the cataractous eyes and 352.3±96.6 μV and 12.0±1.5 ms in the fellow eyes. The mean amplitudes and implicit times of ERG b-waves were, respectively, 390.1±108.7 μV and 63.4±27.9 ms in the cataractous eyes and 415.3±119.1 μV and 59.0±9.3 ms in the fellow eyes. The mean amplitudes of the a- and b-waves were significantly lower and the mean implicit times of the a- and b-wave were significantly longer in the cataractous eyes as compared to those of the fellow eyes. Postoperative visual acuity was similar in cataractous and fellow eyes. Even though single flash ERG was influenced due to mature cataract, eyes revealed good postoperative visual acuity. Single flash ERG does not always reflect the foveal function and the visual pathway; nevertheless, it remains a reliable guide to evaluate visual prognosis before cataract surgery. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Russia | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 3 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 1 | 33% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 67% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
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 18 October 2016.
All research outputs
#17,283,763
of 25,368,786 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#1,804
of 3,712 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#216,521
of 332,549 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#31
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,368,786 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,712 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 332,549 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.