↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Early and intermediate age-related macular degeneration: update and clinical review

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Interventions in Aging, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
87 Mendeley
Title
Early and intermediate age-related macular degeneration: update and clinical review
Published in
Clinical Interventions in Aging, October 2017
DOI 10.2147/cia.s142685
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alfredo Garcia-Layana, Franciso Cabrera-López, José García-Arumí, Lluís Arias-Barquet, José M Ruiz-Moreno

Abstract

Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is the leading cause of irreversible central vision loss in developed countries. With the aging of population, AMD will become globally an increasingly important and prevalent disease worldwide. It is a complex disease whose etiology is associated with both genetic and environmental risk factors. An extensive decline in the quality of life and progressive need of daily living assistance resulting from AMD among those most severely affected highlights the essential role of preventive strategies, particularly advising patients to quit smoking. In addition, maintaining a healthy diet, controlling other risk factors (such as hypertension, obesity, and atherosclerosis), and the use of nutritional supplements (antioxidants) are recommendable. Genetic testing may be especially important in patients with a family history of AMD. Recently, unifying criteria for the clinical classification of AMD, defining no apparent aging changes; normal aging changes; and early, intermediate, and late AMD stages, are of value in predicting AMD risk of progression and in establishing recommendations for the diagnosis, therapeutic approach, and follow-up of patients. The present review is focused on early and intermediate AMD and presents a description of the clinical characteristics and ophthalmological findings for these stages, together with algorithms for the diagnosis and management of patients, which are easily applicable in daily clinical practice.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 87 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 20 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 23%
Student > Master 13 15%
Student > Bachelor 10 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 8%
Other 17 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 31%
Unspecified 21 24%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 7%
Other 16 18%

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 12 April 2018.
All research outputs
#11,384,149
of 12,799,521 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#1,230
of 1,317 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#267,076
of 314,162 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#56
of 58 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,799,521 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,317 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 314,162 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 58 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.