↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Topical ophthalmic NSAIDs: a discussion with focus on nepafenac ophthalmic suspension

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Ophthalmology, June 2008
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

patent
11 patents
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 Mendeley
Title
Topical ophthalmic NSAIDs: a discussion with focus on nepafenac ophthalmic suspension
Published in
Clinical Ophthalmology, June 2008
DOI 10.2147/opth.s1067
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bruce I Gaynes, Anne Onyekwuluje

Abstract

The removal of diclofenac sodium ophthalmic solution as a viable pharmaceutical entity in September 1999 from the US market spurred considerable interest in the general safety and effectiveness of topical ophthalmic NSAIDs for treatment of anterior segment inflammation. In late 1999 the use of topical ocular NSAIDs declined in the US as a result of incidents involving corneal melts and toxicity surrounding use of generic diclofenac. However, since the removal of diclofenac sodium ophthalmic solution from the marketplace, ophthalmic NSAIDs have regained use as viable pharmacotherapeutic entities. Moreover, several new ophthalmic NSAID products have recently been introduced for commercial use in the US including the novel chemical entity nepafenac. The purpose of this report is to revisit the use of topical ophthalmic NSAIDs for the treatment of surgically induced anterior segment inflammation with a particular focus on nepafenac. Nepafenac is unique among ophthalmic NSAIDs in that it is a prodrug deaminated to amfenac, a highly effective non-selective cyclooxygenase inhibitor. In the case of topical ophthalmic NSAIDs, practitioners should carefully weigh the cost-benefit of implementing "highly potent" new drug products because perturbations in pharmacodynamic response due to the inherent novelty in terms of chemical designs may outweigh the demonstrated replicative pharmacologic action of all topical ophthalmic NSAIDs.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 62 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 24%
Student > Master 10 16%
Student > Postgraduate 8 13%
Student > Bachelor 7 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Other 11 17%
Unknown 7 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 43%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 10 16%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 3 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Engineering 3 5%
Other 8 13%
Unknown 9 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 09 January 2024.
All research outputs
#5,446,629
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#491
of 3,712 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,967
of 97,663 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#6
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,712 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 97,663 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 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 50% of its contemporaries.