↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Intersession test—retest variability of conventional and novel parameters using the MP-1 microperimeter

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Ophthalmology, December 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 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 Mendeley
Title
Intersession test—retest variability of conventional and novel parameters using the MP-1 microperimeter
Published in
Clinical Ophthalmology, December 2015
DOI 10.2147/opth.s92018
Pubmed ID
Authors

Evan Wong, David Mackey, William Morgan, Fred Chen

Abstract

To investigate the intersession test-retest variability (TRV) of topography- and threshold-based parameters derived from the Nidek MP-1. Prospective observational study. Sixteen participants with and without central scotoma underwent microperimetry in one eye over three sessions at 1-month intervals in a single institution. We calculated 95% coefficient of repeatability (CR) for the number of normal-suspect (NS) loci, relative scotoma (RS) and dense scotoma (DS), median macular sensitivity (MS), mean sensitivity of responding loci (RLS), perilesional loci (PLS), and extralesional loci (ELS). Topographical agreement score of mapping NS and DS loci (TASNS and TASDS) were also calculated for each patient. Mean (range) age was 50 (21-86) years. The CR (95% confidence intervals) for NS, RS, and DS were 9.9 (6.5-13.3), 9.5 (6.2-12.7), and 3.0 (1.1-4.1) respectively. CR (95% CIs) for median MS, mean RLS, PLS, and ELS were 3.4 (2.3-4.5), 1.6 (1.1-2.2), 1.8 (0.9-2.6), and 2.8 (1.5-4.0) dB. We found significant change in thresholds between Test 1, and Tests 2 and 3 (both P=0.03), but not between Tests 2 and 3 (P=0.8). Medians (range) TASNS and TASDS were 74% (39%-100%) and 77% (0%-97%), respectively, between Tests 2 and 3. We recommend the use of four DS loci (upper limit of CR) as the limit of TRV for assessing change. There was large interindividual variability in NS or DS mapping agreement. We recommend discarding the first microperimetry test and caution the use of a change in spatial distribution to determine disease progression.

Twitter Demographics

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

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 43%
Student > Bachelor 2 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 4 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 38%
Computer Science 2 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 10%
Psychology 1 5%
Materials Science 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 7 33%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 29 December 2015.
All research outputs
#7,530,767
of 12,488,808 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#650
of 1,597 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#166,020
of 347,938 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#48
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,488,808 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,597 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 347,938 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.