↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Short-term effects of relaxation music on patients suffering from primary open-angle glaucoma

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Ophthalmology, October 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 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
Title
Short-term effects of relaxation music on patients suffering from primary open-angle glaucoma
Published in
Clinical Ophthalmology, October 2015
DOI 10.2147/opth.s88732
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas Bertelmann, Ilse Strempel

Abstract

To evaluate whether additive relaxation music (RM) has an adjuvant short-term effect on physiological and psychological parameters in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma. Prospective, randomized clinical trial. Patients in the therapy group (TG) received a 30-minute RM via headphones, whereas members of the control group (CG) did not. Best corrected visual acuity, intraocular pressure, visual field testing, short- and long-term mental states, and blood levels of different stress hormones were analyzed and compared. A total of 25 (61%)/16 (39%) patients were assigned to the TG/CG. Best corrected visual acuity, daily intraocular pressure, and short-term mental state (KAB) development were significantly better in the TG in comparison to controls. Visual field testing, long-term mental well-being (profile of mood states), and adrenalin, cortisol, and endothelin-I blood levels did not differ significantly between both groups. Additive RM applied on a daily basis can positively impact various physiological and psychological parameters in the short term.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 8 18%
Researcher 7 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 7%
Student > Master 2 4%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 17 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 22%
Psychology 8 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 16 36%
Attention Score in Context

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 10 November 2015.
All research outputs
#17,283,763
of 25,368,786 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#1,804
of 3,712 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#171,587
of 286,859 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#49
of 81 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,368,786 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 286,859 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.