| Title |
An exploratory study evaluating the effects of macular carotenoid supplementation in various retinal diseases
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Ophthalmology, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/opth.s102798 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Roxanne Crosby-Nwaobi, Philip Hykin, Tunde Peto, Sobha Sivaprasad |
| Abstract |
The aim of this study was to assess the impact of daily oral supplementation with Macushield (10 mg/d meso-zeaxanthin, 10 mg/d lutein, and 2 mg/d zeaxanthin) on eye health in patients with retinal diseases by assessing the macular pigment (MP) profile, the visual function, and the quality of life. Fifty-one patients with various retinal diseases were supplemented daily and followed up for 6 months. The MP optical density was measured using the customized heterochromatic flicker photometry and dual-wavelength autofluorescence. Visual function was evaluated by assessing the change in best corrected visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and glare sensitivity in mesopic and photopic conditions. Vision-related and general quality of life changes were determined using the National Eye Insititute- Visual Function Questionnaire-25 (NEI-VFQ-25) and EuroQoL-5 dimension questionnaires. A statistically significant increase in the MP optical density was observed using the dual-wavelength autofluorescence (P=0.04) but not with the customized heterochromatic flicker photometry. Statistically significant (P<0.05) improvements in glare sensitivity in low and medium spatial frequencies were observed at 3 months and 6 months. Ceiling effects confounded other visual function tests and quality of life changes. Supplementation with the three carotenoids enhances certain aspects of visual performance in retinal diseases. |
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 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 28 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 21% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 18% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 11% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 4% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 11 | 39% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 18% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 18% |
| Chemical Engineering | 1 | 4% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 4% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 13 | 46% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 30 September 2020.
All research outputs
#7,960,052
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#708
of 3,712 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,844
of 311,866 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#23
of 80 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th 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 79% 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 311,866 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 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 80 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.