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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
| Title |
Telemedicine for diabetic retinopathy screening using an ultra-widefield fundus camera
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Ophthalmology, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2147/opth.s135287 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nazimul Hussain, Maryam Edraki, Rima Tahhan, Nishanth Sanalkumar, Sami Kenz, Nagwa Khalil Akasha, Brian Mtemererwa, Nahed Mohammed |
| Abstract |
Telemedicine reporting of diabetic retinopathy (DR) screening using ultra-widefield (UWF) fundus camera. Cross-sectional study of diabetic patients who visited the endocrinology department of a private multi-specialty hospital in United Arab Emirates between April 2015 and January 2017 who underwent UWF fundus imaging. Fundus pictures are then accessed at the Retina Clinic in the Department of Ophthalmology. Primary outcome measure was incidence of any form of DR detected. The secondary outcome measure was failure to take good image and inability to grade. A total of 1,024 diabetic individuals were screened for DR from April 2015 to January 2017 in the department of Endocrinology. Rate of DR was 9.27%; 165 eyes of 95 individuals were diagnosed to have some form of DR. Mild non-proliferative DR (NPDR) was seen in 114 of 165 eyes (69.09%), moderate NPDR in 32 eyes (19.39%), severe NPDR in six eyes (3.64%), and proliferative DR (PDR) in 13 eyes (7.88%). The secondary outcome measure of poor image acquisition was seen in one individual who had an image acquired in one eye that could not be graded due to bad picture quality. The present study has shown the effectiveness of DR screening using UWF fundus camera. It has shown the effectiveness of trained nursing personnel taking fundus images. This model can be replicated in any private multi-specialty hospital and reduce the burden of DR screening in the retina clinic and enhance early detection of treatable DR. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 42 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 12% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 8 | 19% |
| Unknown | 16 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 29% |
| Psychology | 3 | 7% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 7% |
| Engineering | 2 | 5% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 19 | 45% |
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 02 September 2017.
All research outputs
#14,731,975
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#1,035
of 3,687 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#160,551
of 328,005 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#13
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 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 3,687 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one 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 328,005 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 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.