↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Herpes simplex keratitis: challenges in diagnosis and clinical management

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Ophthalmology, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
77 Mendeley
Title
Herpes simplex keratitis: challenges in diagnosis and clinical management
Published in
Clinical Ophthalmology, January 2017
DOI 10.2147/opth.s80475
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tayaba Azher, Xiao-Tang Yin, Deena Tajfirouz, Andrew Huang, Patrick Stuart

Abstract

Herpes simplex virus is responsible for numerous ocular diseases, the most common of which is herpetic stromal keratitis. This is a recurrent infection of the cornea that typically begins with a subclinical infection of the cornea that establishes a latent infection of sensory ganglia, most often the trigeminal ganglia. Recurring infections occur when the virus is reactivated from latency and travels back to the cornea, where it restimulates an inflammatory response. This inflammatory response can lead to decreased corneal sensation, scarring, and blindness. The diagnosis of these lesions as the result of a recurrent herpes simplex virus infection can at times be problematic. Currently, herpetic stromal keratitis is diagnosed by its clinical presentation on the slit-lamp examination, but the literature does not always support the accuracy of these clinical findings. Other diagnostic tests such as polymerase chain reaction assay, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, immunofluorescent antibody, and viral cultures have provided more definitive diagnosis, but also have some limitations. That said, accurate diagnosis is necessary for proper treatment, in order to prevent serious consequences. Current treatment reduces the severity of lesions and controls further viral spread, but does not provide a cure.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters 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 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 77 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 12 16%
Other 10 13%
Researcher 8 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 10%
Student > Master 8 10%
Other 13 17%
Unknown 18 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 34 44%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 4%
Other 5 6%
Unknown 23 30%

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 01 March 2017.
All research outputs
#3,282,149
of 12,488,808 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#199
of 1,597 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,621
of 335,352 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#9
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,488,808 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,597 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 335,352 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.