↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Successful treatment of syphilitic uveitis in HIV-positive patients

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Ophthalmology, August 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 Mendeley
Title
Successful treatment of syphilitic uveitis in HIV-positive patients
Published in
Clinical Ophthalmology, August 2013
DOI 10.2147/opth.s46876
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mohd-Jamil Nurfahzura, Hashim Hanizasurana, Embong Zunaina, Hussein Adil

Abstract

We report successful treatment of syphilitic uveitis in a case series of three Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-positive patients at Malaysia's Selayang Hospital eye clinic. All three patients with syphilitic uveitis were male, aged from 23 to 35 years old, with a history of high-risk behaviors. Of the patients, two presented with blurring of vision and only one patient presented with floaters in the affected eye. Ocular examination revealed intermediate uveitis (case 1 and case 3) and panuveitis (case 2). Each patient showed a high Venereal Disease Research Laboratory (VDRL) titer at presentation and they were also newly diagnosed as HIV positive with variable CD4 counts. All three patients responded well to a neurosyphilis regimen of intravenous penicillin G. At 3 months posttreatment, there was reduction in VDRL titer with improvement of vision in the affected eye. Diagnosis of syphilis needs to be ruled out in all cases of uveitis. All syphilitic uveitis cases should have HIV screening and vice versa, as syphilis is one of the most common infectious diseases associated with HIV-positive patients. Early detection and treatment are important for a good visual outcome.

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 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 4%
Spain 1 4%
United States 1 4%
Peru 1 4%
Unknown 21 84%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 4 16%
Researcher 3 12%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Student > Master 2 8%
Other 1 4%
Other 4 16%
Unknown 9 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 48%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Unknown 10 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 21 December 2013.
All research outputs
#14,599,900
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#1,036
of 3,712 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#110,013
of 210,076 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#20
of 97 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 210,076 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 97 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.