| Title |
Macular sensitivity after half-dose verteporfin photodynamic therapy in central serous chorioretinopathy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Ophthalmology, December 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/opth.s95748 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Thuss Sanguansak, Prapapan Pitujaturont, Yosanan Yospaiboon, Suthasinee Sinawat, Tanapat Ratanapakorn, Chavakij Bhoomibunchoo |
| Abstract |
To study the macular sensitivity after half-dose verteporfin photodynamic therapy in patients with resolved central serous chorioretinopathy using the automated static perimeter. Prospective consecutive case study of 24 patients with resolved central serous chorioretinopathy was performed. The macular sensitivity was measured using a conventional automated static perimeter with the Swedish interactive threshold algorithm 10-2 and foveal threshold. Best corrected visual acuity, intraocular pressure, fundus examination, macular thickness, and volume were also examined. The mean macular sensitivities of the affected eyes and their normal fellow eyes were calculated and compared. P<0.05 was considered statistically significant. The mean macular sensitivities of the affected eyes were lower than the normal fellow eyes with a statistically significant difference in all areas of the study (P<0.05). Best corrected visual acuity improved significantly from pretreatment (0.26±0.3 logMAR) to posttreatment (0.075±0.15 logMAR, P<0.05). Macular thicknesses in affected eyes were 230.66±67.34 μm and in the normal eyes were 238.33±92.26 μm (P=0.68). Macular volumes in affected eyes were 8.77±0.49 and in the normal eyes were 8.70±0.50 (P=0.60). These findings were not statistically significant. Eyes with resolved central serous chorioretinopathy after half-dose verteporfin photodynamic therapy had lower macular sensitivity than normal fellow eyes. These findings agreed well with the previous microperimetric studies. The conventional automated static perimeter can also be used when a microperimeter is not available. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 15 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 3 | 20% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 20% |
| Researcher | 3 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 7% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 3 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 47% |
| Psychology | 1 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 6 | 40% |
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 02 December 2015.
All research outputs
#19,945,185
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#2,475
of 3,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#275,107
of 395,418 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#54
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,714 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 395,418 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 70 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.