↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

One-site versus two-site phacotrabeculectomy: a prospective randomized study

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Interventions in Aging, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
Title
One-site versus two-site phacotrabeculectomy: a prospective randomized study
Published in
Clinical Interventions in Aging, January 2015
DOI 10.2147/cia.s89401
Pubmed ID
Authors

MARILITA MOSCHOS, Irini P Chatziralli, Michael Tsatsos

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety of one-site and two-site combined phacotrabeculectomy with foldable posterior chamber intraocular lens implantation. Thirty-four patients (41 eyes) with glaucoma and cataract were randomly assigned to undergo either a one-site (22 eyes) or a two-site (19 eyes) combined procedure. One-site approach consisted of a standard superior phacotrabeculectomy with a limbus-based conjunctival flap, while two-site approach consisted of a clear cornea phacoemulsification and a separate superior trabeculectomy with a limbus-based conjunctival flap. Mean follow-up period was 54 months (standard deviation [SD] 2.3). Mean preoperative intraocular pressure (IOP) in the one-site group was 21.3 mmHg (SD 2.8) and in the two-site group was 21.8 mmHg (SD 3.0) (P>0.1). Mean postoperative IOP significantly decreased in both groups compared to the preoperative level and was 15.6 mmHg (SD 3.5) in the one-site group and 14.9 mmHg (SD 2.7) in the two-site group. Three months later, the difference between the two groups was not statistically significant (P=0.058). The one-site group required significantly more medications than the two-site group (P=0.03). Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) improved similarly in both groups, but there was less postoperative (induced) astigmatism in the two-site group in a marginal statistical level (P=0.058). Intra- and postoperative complications were comparable in the two groups. Both techniques yielded similar results concerning final BCVA and IOP reduction. However, the two-site group had less induced astigmatism and a better postoperative IOP control with less required postoperative antiglaucoma medications compared to the one-site group.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters 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 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 3 13%
Student > Bachelor 3 13%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 8%
Researcher 2 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 8%
Other 7 29%
Unknown 5 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 67%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 13%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 4%
Unknown 4 17%

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 25 August 2015.
All research outputs
#2,938,716
of 5,526,382 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#425
of 795 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,997
of 193,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#30
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 5,526,382 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 795 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 193,554 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.