| Title |
Relationship between preoperative axial length and myopic shift over 3 years after congenital cataract surgery with primary intraocular lens implantation at the National Institute of Ophthalmology of Peru, 2007–2011
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Ophthalmology, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.2147/opth.s152560 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Diego Alejandro Valera Cornejo, Abel Flores Boza |
| Abstract |
To determine the relationship between the preoperative axial length and the myopic shift over 3 years after congenital cataract surgery with primary intraocular lens implantation and other related factors. In this retrospective cohort study, the axial length was measured and assigned into 2 groups (>21.5 mm and ≤21.5 mm), visual axis obscuration, laterality of cataract, age of surgery and follow-up time were assessed and compared to the myopic shift. The mean myopic shift was 3.6 (standard deviation [SD]: 2.3) diopters (D) in all patients; 3.2 (3.3) and 3.9 (3.2) D for each group respectively (p=0.359). In unilateral cataracts the mean myopic shift was 6.3 D and in bilateral cases was 3.0 D (p=0.001). In bilateral cataracts, the shift was 2.6 D (SD: 2.0) and 3.4 D (SD: 1.8), respectively (p=0.098). There was no relationship between the initial axial length and the myopic shift in all patients. Unilateral cataracts had a greater myopic shift over 3 years. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 17 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 2 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 12% |
| Other | 4 | 24% |
| Unknown | 3 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 65% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 3 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 13 September 2018.
All research outputs
#17,292,294
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#1,803
of 3,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#283,821
of 448,849 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#24
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,714 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 448,849 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.