↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Glaucoma therapy: preservative-free for all?

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Ophthalmology, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (61st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
82 Mendeley
Title
Glaucoma therapy: preservative-free for all?
Published in
Clinical Ophthalmology, April 2018
DOI 10.2147/opth.s150816
Pubmed ID
Authors

John Thygesen

Abstract

Preservatives used in topical glaucoma medications have a plethora of well-described toxic effects on the ocular surface. Such ocular toxicity is manifest clinically as ocular surface disease (OSD) and has been confirmed in epidemiologic, prospective clinical trials and studies in which patients are switched from preservative-added to preservative-free topical therapy. Such toxicity has implications not only for tolerability, but also for adherence and persistence with therapy that is known to be poor in glaucoma. Glaucoma medication is now widely available in preservative-free formulations, and the question arises as to which patients should receive preservative-free glaucoma therapy in preference to preservative-added medication. A case can be made for several subpopulations of patients who might particularly benefit from preservative-free medication: patients with existing OSD, older patients, younger adult patients, female patients, pediatric and juvenile patients, patients who work in air-conditioned environments or who use electronic screens frequently, patients with medical risk factors for OSD, patients in whom trabecular surgery may become indicated in the future, contact lens users, perhaps patients with Asian ethnicity and patients with severe or treatment-refractory glaucoma. Whilst arguments could be made for selecting patients for preservative-free medication on the basis of their existing risk of OSD, collectively, these patients form a significant proportion of the glaucoma patient population as a whole and, in the absence of any cost premium or positive indication for preservative-added medication, preservative-free glaucoma medication for all patients seems an appropriate strategy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users 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 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 82 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 7 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 9%
Student > Postgraduate 7 9%
Student > Master 7 9%
Student > Bachelor 6 7%
Other 18 22%
Unknown 30 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 30%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 8 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 5%
Psychology 2 2%
Computer Science 2 2%
Other 7 9%
Unknown 34 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 June 2018.
All research outputs
#8,039,503
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#704
of 3,687 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#130,004
of 344,304 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#16
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
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 done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 344,304 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 61% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 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 51% of its contemporaries.