| Title |
Scleral lens for keratoconus: technology update
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Ophthalmology, October 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/opth.s52483 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Varsha M Rathi, Preeji S Mandathara, Mukesh Taneja, Srikanth Dumpati, Virender S Sangwan |
| Abstract |
Scleral lenses are large diameter lenses which rest over the sclera, unlike the conventional contact lenses which rest on the cornea. These lenses are fitted to not touch the cornea and there is a space created between the cornea and the lens. These lenses are inserted in the eyes after filling with sterile isotonic fluid. Generally, scleral contact lenses are used for high irregular astigmatism as seen in various corneal ectatic diseases such as keratoconus, pellucid marginal degeneration, or/and as liquid bandage in ocular surface disorders. In this article, we review the new developments, that have taken place over the years, in the field of scleral contact lenses as regard to new designs, materials, manufacturing technologies, and fitting strategies particularly for keratoconus. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 129 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 127 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 20 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 19 | 15% |
| Other | 16 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 9 | 7% |
| Researcher | 8 | 6% |
| Other | 24 | 19% |
| Unknown | 33 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 57 | 44% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 18 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 3% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 2% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 7 | 5% |
| Unknown | 39 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 19 June 2018.
All research outputs
#14,534,821
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#1,020
of 3,712 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#131,373
of 286,859 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#19
of 81 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 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 3,712 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 286,859 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 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 81 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.