↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Investigation of postoperative intraocular pressure in cases of silicone oil removal using 25-gauge transconjunctival sutureless vitrectomy with oblique incisions

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

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (56th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (59th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
6 Mendeley
Title
Investigation of postoperative intraocular pressure in cases of silicone oil removal using 25-gauge transconjunctival sutureless vitrectomy with oblique incisions
Published in
Clinical Ophthalmology, October 2015
DOI 10.2147/opth.s93376
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hirotsugu Takashina, Akira Watanabe, Hiroshi Tsuneoka

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate postoperative intraocular pressure (IOP) in cases of silicone oil (SO) removal when using 25-gauge transconjunctival sutureless vitrectomy (TSV) with oblique incisions. We enrolled ten consecutive eyes with SO removal (SO group) and eleven consecutive eyes with idiopathic epiretinal membrane (ERM) as the initial vitrectomy (ERM group) in cases using 25-gauge TSV with oblique incisions. Postoperative IOPs were compared between the two groups at each of the four examination periods. No significant differences were identified in any of the periods examined. The use of 25-gauge TSV with oblique incisions resulted in almost equivalent postoperative IOPs between cases with SO removal and idiopathic ERM as the initial operation. Self-sealing sclerotomy in 25-gauge TSV with oblique incisions may primarily involve the valve architecture, and be complemented by vitreous incarceration.

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 6 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 6 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Professor 2 33%
Researcher 1 17%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 17%
Student > Master 1 17%
Unknown 1 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 83%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 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 November 2015.
All research outputs
#7,048,546
of 12,488,808 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#506
of 1,597 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#105,862
of 251,649 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#32
of 82 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,488,808 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 66% 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 251,649 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 56% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 82 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 59% of its contemporaries.