| Title |
Endothelial cell counts after Descemet’s stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty versus penetrating keratoplasty in Asian eyes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Ophthalmology, April 2012
|
| DOI | 10.2147/opth.s26343 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marcus Ang, Jodhbir S Mehta, Arundhati Anshu, Kiat Wong, Hla M Htoon, Donald Tan |
| Abstract |
The purpose of this study was to compare endothelial cell counts after Descemet's stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK) and penetrating keratoplasty in Asian eyes. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Singapore | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 28 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 28% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 17% |
| Unknown | 6 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 62% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 9 | 31% |
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 2012.
All research outputs
#20,823,121
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#2,545
of 3,687 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#135,504
of 173,277 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#19
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 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 3,687 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 173,277 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.