| Title |
The microstructural and functional changes in the macula of heavy habitual smokers
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Ophthalmology, February 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10792-013-9716-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Güngör Sobacı, Samir Musayev, Yıldırım Karslıoglu, Fatih Ç. Gündoğan, Gökhan Özge, Üzeyir Erdem, Atilla Bayer |
| Abstract |
To investigate whether heavy habitual smoking affects microstructures and functions of the macula, 45 age- (20-39 years old) and sex-matched adult smokers (≥1 box/day for ≥5 years) and 45 nonsmokers (controls) were enrolled in this case-control study. Central macular thickness (CMT), macular autofluorescent pigment density (MAPD), macular electroretinogram (ERG), and photostress recovery time (PRT) measurements were performed. The mean age of smokers and nonsmokers was 32.9 ± 3.9 and 33.1 ± 4.1 years, respectively (p = 0.43), and smoking duration was 11 ± 5.6 years. CMT in smokers (220 ± 28 μm) and nonsmokers (217.2 ± 31 μm; p = 0.57) was similar. Smokers had lower MAPD values (124.6) than nonsmokers (138.2) (p = 0.010). Multifocal ERG parameters in the central (6°) hexagon were similar in both groups (p > 0.05 for latency and amplitudes of P1 and N1). PRT in smokers and nonsmokers was similar (7.2 ± 1.2 and 7.4 ± 1.9 min, respectively; p = 0.33); however, foveal threshold value (FTV) at the first minute after photostress was statistically higher in smokers (36.1 ± 1.04 dB) than nonsmokers (34.8 ± 1.05 dB) (p = 0.011). We conclude that decreased MAPD and altered response to photostress may be indicative of early nicotine toxicity in microstructurally sound macula of adult chronic smokers. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 11 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 18% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 1 | 9% |
| Other | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 4 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 36% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 18% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 4 | 36% |
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 09 March 2013.
All research outputs
#15,266,089
of 22,701,287 outputs
Outputs from International Ophthalmology
#368
of 1,030 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#121,754
of 193,508 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Ophthalmology
#9
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,701,287 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,030 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 193,508 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.