| Title |
Do eyes with and without optic neuritis in multiple sclerosis age equally?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, September 2018
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ndt.s169638 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jana Lizrova Preiningerova, Anna Grishko, Lukas Sobisek, Michaela Andelova, Barbora Benova, Karolina Kucerova, Eva Kubala Havrdova |
| Abstract |
Anterior visual pathway reflects axonal loss caused by both optic neuritis (ON) and neurodegeneration in multiple sclerosis (MS). Although the axonal injury post-ON is thought to be complete by 6 months of onset, most studies using optical coherence tomography (OCT) to evaluate retinal changes as a marker of neurodegeneration exclude eyes with a history of ON or consider them separately. The objective of this study was to assess whether the eyes post-ON (>6 months) show in later years different rate of chronic retinal changes than the fellow eyes not affected by ON. Fifty-six patients with MS with a history of ON in one eye (ON eyes) and no ON in the fellow (FL) eye, who were followed by OCT for >2 years, were selected from a cohort of patients with MS. Paired eye analysis was performed. Mean interval post-ON at baseline was 5.65 (SD 5.05) years. Mean length of follow-up by OCT was 4.57 years. There was no statistical difference in absolute or relative thinning of retinal nerve fiber layer in peripapillary area between the ON and FL eyes. This study has shown that we do not need to exclude eyes with a history of ON from longitudinal studies of neurodegeneration in MS, provided that we use data outside of the frame of acute changes post-ON. Long-term changes of peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer in ON and FL eyes are equal. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 12 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 25% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 1 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 4 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 17% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 17% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 6 | 50% |
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 07 September 2018.
All research outputs
#22,767,715
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#2,583
of 3,131 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#302,660
of 345,739 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#55
of 101 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,131 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 345,739 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 101 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.