↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Relationship between progression of visual field defect and intraocular pressure in primary open-angle glaucoma

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

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
Title
Relationship between progression of visual field defect and intraocular pressure in primary open-angle glaucoma
Published in
Clinical Ophthalmology, July 2015
DOI 10.2147/opth.s86450
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tomoko Naito, Keiji Yoshikawa, Shiro Mizoue, Mami Nanno, Tairo Kimura, Hirotaka Suzumura, Fumio Shiraga

Abstract

To analyze the relationship between intraocular pressure (IOP) and the progression of visual field defects in Japanese primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) and normal-tension glaucoma (NTG) patients. The subjects of the study were patients undergoing treatment for POAG or NTG who had performed visual field tests at least ten times with a Humphrey field analyzer (Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm standard, C30-2 program). The progression of visual field defects was defined by a significantly negative value of the mean deviation slope at the final visual field test during the follow-up period. The relationships between the progression of visual field defects and IOP, as well as other clinical factors, were retrospectively analyzed. A total of 156 eyes of 156 patients were included in the analysis. Significant progression of visual field defects was observed in 70 eyes of 70 patients (44.9%), while no significant progression was evident in 86 eyes of 86 patients (55.1%). The eyes with visual field defect progression had significantly lower baseline IOP (P<0.05), as well as significantly lower IOP reduction rate (P<0.01). The standard deviation of IOP values during follow-up was significantly greater in the eyes with visual field defect progression than in eyes without (P<0.05). Reducing IOP is thought to be useful for Japanese POAG or NTG patients to suppress the progression of visual field defects. In NTG, IOP management should take into account not only achieving the target IOP, but also minimizing the fluctuation of IOP during follow-up period.

Twitter Demographics

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

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 2 9%
Unknown 21 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 4 17%
Researcher 3 13%
Student > Master 3 13%
Student > Bachelor 2 9%
Other 2 9%
Other 5 22%
Unknown 4 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 52%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 13%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Neuroscience 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 4 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 30 July 2015.
All research outputs
#7,208,393
of 12,488,808 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#537
of 1,597 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#105,511
of 235,573 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#17
of 96 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,488,808 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,597 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 235,573 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 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 96 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 66% of its contemporaries.