↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Clinical characteristics and visual outcomes in infectious scleritis: a review

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
Title
Clinical characteristics and visual outcomes in infectious scleritis: a review
Published in
Clinical Ophthalmology, November 2013
DOI 10.2147/opth.s37809
Pubmed ID
Authors

Veena Raiji, Radhika Ramenaden

Abstract

Infection is a very important but rare cause of scleritis, occurring in about 5%-10% of all patients presenting with scleral inflammation. However, due to the similarity of its presentation, infectious scleritis is often initially managed as autoimmune, potentially further worsening its outcome. The overall visual outcome in infectious scleritis is generally worse than its autoimmune counterparts, perhaps because of the delay in diagnosis or because of the aggressive nature of associated microbes. Thus, there is a definite need for insight into the diagnostic approach and treatment options for this ocular disease process. Several studies and case reports have been published in recent years that have provided useful information regarding the presenting clinical features and etiologic microbial agents in infectious scleritis. This review summarizes the important findings in the literature that may aid in differentiating infectious scleritis from other etiologies, including predisposing factors, microbe-specific characteristics, diagnostic tools, treatment modalities, and outcomes.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 30 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 7 23%
Other 5 17%
Student > Master 4 13%
Researcher 3 10%
Professor 3 10%
Other 5 17%
Unknown 3 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 67%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 17%

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 04 November 2013.
All research outputs
#3,114,609
of 4,505,915 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#557
of 865 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71,209
of 103,560 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#50
of 64 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,505,915 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 865 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.4. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 103,560 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 64 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.