| Title |
Color vision abnormality as an initial presentation of the complete type of congenital stationary night blindness
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Ophthalmology, August 2013
|
| DOI | 10.2147/opth.s49496 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xue Tan, Aya Aoki, Yasuo Yanagi |
| Abstract |
Patients with the complete form of congenital stationary night blindness (CSNB) often have reduced visual acuity, myopia, impaired night vision, and sometimes nystagmus and strabismus, however, they seldom complain of color vision abnormality. A 17-year-old male who was at technical school showed abnormalities in the color perception test for employment, and was referred to our hospital for a detailed examination. He had no family history of color vision deficiency and no other symptoms. During the initial examination, his best-corrected visual acuity was 1.2 in both eyes. His fundus showed no abnormalities except for somewhat yellowish reflex in the fovea of both eyes. Electroretinogram (ERG) showed a good response in cone ERG and 30 Hz flicker ERG, however, the bright flash, mixed rod and cone ERG showed a negative type with a reduced b-wave (positive deflection). There was no response in the rod ERG, either. From the findings of the typical ERG, the patient was diagnosed with complete congenital stationary night blindness. This case underscores the importance of ERG in order to diagnose the cause of a color vision anomaly. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 17 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 24% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 18% |
| Researcher | 3 | 18% |
| Other | 2 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 12% |
| Unknown | 2 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 5 | 29% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 18% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 2 | 12% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 12% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 12% |
| Unknown | 2 | 12% |
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 23 October 2013.
All research outputs
#17,438,425
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#1,780
of 3,687 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#133,568
of 210,451 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#44
of 95 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 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 3,687 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 210,451 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 95 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.