↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

What we know about ocular manifestations of Ebola

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Ophthalmology, November 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 Mendeley
Title
What we know about ocular manifestations of Ebola
Published in
Clinical Ophthalmology, November 2014
DOI 10.2147/opth.s73583
Pubmed ID
Authors

Majid Moshirfar, Carlton R Fenzl, Zhan Li

Abstract

Ebola hemorrhagic fever is a deadly disease caused by several species of ebolavirus. The current outbreak of 2014 is unique in that it has affected a greater number of people than ever before. It also has an unusual geographic distribution. Nonspecific findings such as fever and generalized weakness have traditionally been very common early in the acute phase. Ophthalmic manifestations have also been reported in significant numbers. Conjunctival injection has been identified in both the acute and late phases. Subconjunctival hemorrhage and excessive lacrimation have also been reported. Various forms of uveitis have been associated with the convalescent phase of the disease. When identified in conjunction with other signs such as fever, acute findings such as conjunctivitis may contribute to the diagnosis of Ebola hemorrhagic fever. Ideally, serologic testing should be performed prior to isolation and treatment of these individuals. Considering the prevalence of the current outbreak and the threat of transcontinental spread, ophthalmic health professionals need to be aware of the ocular manifestations of Ebola hemorrhagic fever as well as the associated signs and symptoms in order to prevent further spread.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Thailand 1 3%
Unknown 35 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 19%
Other 6 17%
Professor 3 8%
Librarian 3 8%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 6%
Other 9 25%
Unknown 6 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 56%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Arts and Humanities 1 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 6 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 10 April 2015.
All research outputs
#1,775,917
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#104
of 3,712 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,305
of 273,826 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#1
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% 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 particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 273,826 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.