| Title |
Contact lens care tips for patients: an optometrist’s perspective
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Optometry, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2147/opto.s139651 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Christopher W Lievens, Kacey C Cilimberg, Alison Moore |
| Abstract |
Contact lens (CL) wear has been a viable alternative to spectacle wear for several decades. The interest and desire to wear CLs have been stable in recent years, evidenced by the consistency of new wearers into this category of refractive correction. CLs have become one of the most commonly used medical devices in the market, with more than 40 million wearers in the US. There are many activities in which patients report a preference of CL wear over spectacles (athletics for example). Nearly all patients (even presbyopic patients) have the option of contact lenses today given the expansion of powers and parameters in recent years. Patients eyes are getting dryer as factors of age and the environment. CL materials have improved in recent years in an attempt to meet the challenges of dryer eyes. Despite the improvements in CLs and their care, challenges persist. Patient education, handwashing, compliance with care, and wearing schedule are some of the challenges that providers face in the care of CL patients even today. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 77 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 20 | 26% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 9% |
| Researcher | 4 | 5% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 5% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 8 | 10% |
| Unknown | 32 | 42% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 21 | 27% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 12% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Unknown | 33 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 07 April 2023.
All research outputs
#2,524,677
of 23,559,085 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Optometry
#12
of 102 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,051
of 318,465 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Optometry
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,559,085 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 102 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 318,465 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.