↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Current perspective of neuroprotection and glaucoma

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
patent
15 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
73 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
86 Mendeley
Title
Current perspective of neuroprotection and glaucoma
Published in
Clinical Ophthalmology, November 2015
DOI 10.2147/opth.s80445
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kailin Tian, Shannon Shibata-Germanos, Milena Pahlitzsch, M Francesca Cordeiro

Abstract

Glaucoma is the second leading cause of blindness worldwide and is most notably characterized by progressive optic nerve atrophy and advancing loss of retinal ganglion cells (RGCs). The main concomitant factor is the elevated intraocular pressure (IOP). Existing treatments are focused generally on lowering IOP. However, both RGC loss and optic nerve atrophy can independently occur with IOP at normal levels. In recent years, there has been substantial progress in the development of neuroprotective therapies for glaucoma in order to restore vital visual function. The present review intends to offer a brief insight into conventional glaucoma treatments and discuss exciting current developments of mostly preclinical data in novel neuroprotective strategies for glaucoma that include recent advances in noninvasive diagnostics going beyond IOP maintenance for an enhanced global view. Such strategies now target RGC loss and optic nerve damage, opening a critical therapeutic window for preventative monitoring and treatment.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 86 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 19%
Researcher 15 17%
Student > Master 11 13%
Student > Bachelor 6 7%
Other 6 7%
Other 18 21%
Unknown 14 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 34%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 12 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 12%
Neuroscience 5 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Other 6 7%
Unknown 21 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 03 August 2021.
All research outputs
#7,047,742
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#580
of 3,712 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#81,378
of 294,815 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#16
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,712 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 294,815 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.