| Title |
Peripapillary choroidal thickness in healthy Turkish subjects
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Ophthalmology, July 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/opth.s79919 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hulya Erbagci, Burak Oren, Seydi Okumus, Serhat Kenan, Pelin Celemler, Ibrahim Erbagci |
| Abstract |
The objective of the study reported here was to investigate the normal peripapillary choroidal thickness (CT), measured by enhanced depth imaging optical coherence tomography (EDI-OCT), in healthy Turkish volunteers. In this prospective cross-sectional study, 57 eyes of 57 healthy Turkish subjects were enrolled. Each participant underwent a comprehensive ophthalmic examination and peripapillary CT measurement using EDI-OCT. The mean age of the 25 female and 32 male patients in the study was 30.9±10.6 years (range, 18-56 years). The mean peripapillary CT at the superior, inferior, nasal, and temporal sites was 225±57, 183±47, 220±57, and 233±59 μm, respectively. The inferior peripapillary CT value was significantly lower than the peripapillary CT values (P<0.001 for all), whereas no significant differences were found between the superior, nasal, and temporal peripapillary CT values. The findings of the study revealed that Turkish people had significantly lower peripapillary CT values in the inferior quadrant than in the superior, nasal, and temporal quadrants. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 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 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 10 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 2 | 20% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 10% |
| Other | 1 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 10% |
| Other | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 3 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 40% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 10% |
| Psychology | 1 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 3 | 30% |
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 02 August 2015.
All research outputs
#19,944,091
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#2,475
of 3,712 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#189,297
of 277,610 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#51
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,712 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 277,610 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 86 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.