| Title |
Impact of corneal cross-linking combined with photorefractive keratectomy on blurring strength
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Ophthalmology, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/opth.s100770 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Georgios Labiris, Haris Sideroudi, Dimitris Angelonias, Kimonas Georgantzoglou, Vassilios P Kozobolis |
| Abstract |
The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of corneal cross-linking combined with photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) on blurring strength. A total of 63 patients with keratoconus were recruited for this study, and two study groups were formed according to the therapeutic intervention: corneal collagen cross-linking (CxL) group (33 patients) received corneal cross-linking according to the Dresden protocol, while the rest additionally received topography-guided photorefractive keratectomy (tCxL). The impact of surgical procedure on blurring strength was assessed by power vector analysis. Potential association between blurring strength and vision-specific quality of life was assessed using the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI-VFQ) 25 instrument. Blurring strength presented excellent correlation with NEI-VFQ scores both preoperatively and postoperatively (all P<0.01). Both groups demonstrated nonsignificant changes in best-corrected visual acuity; however, only the tCxL group had significant reduction in blurring strength (13.48+10.86 [preoperative], 4.26+7.99 [postoperative], P=0.042). Only the combined treatment (tCxL) resulted in significant reduction in blurring strength. Moreover, the excellent correlation of blurring strength with NEI-VFQ scores indicates its reliability as an index of self-reported quality of life in keratoconus, since it seems to address the nonsignificant changes in best-corrected visual acuity following CxL treatments that are conceived as subjective improvement by the patient. |
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 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 29 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 14% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 7 | 24% |
| Unknown | 6 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 55% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 10% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 6 | 21% |
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 03 April 2016.
All research outputs
#20,656,820
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#2,605
of 3,712 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#234,499
of 314,727 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#61
of 81 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 13th percentile – i.e., 13% 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 314,727 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% 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 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.