↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Selective laser trabeculoplasty: current perspectives

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Ophthalmology, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
64 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
104 Mendeley
Title
Selective laser trabeculoplasty: current perspectives
Published in
Clinical Ophthalmology, May 2015
DOI 10.2147/opth.s53490
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kate E Leahy, Andrew JR White

Abstract

Selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT) has been used in the treatment of glaucoma for just over a decade. Here, we review the current literature in terms of suggested mechanism, efficacy, method of treatment, predictors of success, adverse events, repeatability, and cost of SLT. The exact mechanism by which SLT lowers intraocular pressure (IOP) remains unknown although circumstantial evidence has come in many forms in relation to structural alteration; oxidative stress and inflammatory responses; tight junction integrity; proliferative responses; and microbubble formation. SLT is as effective as argon laser trabeculoplasty and medications in reducing IOP in glaucoma and ocular hypertension. The treatment is not uniformly effective in all eyes, and its IOP-lowering effect decreases over time. High pretreatment IOP is the strongest predictor of success; however, significant pressure reduction has also been shown in normal-tension glaucoma and in patients already taking multiple antiglaucoma drops. Mild, transient adverse effects are common. Transient IOP spikes usually resolve quickly with or without antiglaucoma treatment but may be problematic in pigmented angles. The limited available evidence suggests SLT is repeatable and cost-effective for the treatment of glaucoma and ocular hypertension.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 104 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Unknown 102 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 19 18%
Researcher 13 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 10%
Student > Bachelor 10 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 9%
Other 24 23%
Unknown 19 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 56 54%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Engineering 4 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Other 13 13%
Unknown 21 20%
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 09 May 2019.
All research outputs
#7,430,186
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#631
of 3,687 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#82,322
of 279,338 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#16
of 61 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 69th 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 82% 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 279,338 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 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 73% of its contemporaries.