↓ Skip to main content

Ischemic optic neuropathy with semaglutide: global observational analysis of sex- and formulation-specific risk

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of Ophthalmology, March 2026
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#18 of 7,519)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
63 news outlets
blogs
3 blogs
twitter
21 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
reddit
16 Redditors
bluesky
7 Bluesky users

Readers on

mendeley
3 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Ischemic optic neuropathy with semaglutide: global observational analysis of sex- and formulation-specific risk
Published in
British Journal of Ophthalmology, March 2026
DOI 10.1136/bjo-2025-328483
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Ischaemic optic neuropathy (ION) is a rare but vision-threatening complication recently linked to GLP-1 receptor agonists, particularly semaglutide. Using over 30 million reports from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (2017-2024), we evaluated formulation- and sex-specific associations. Among 31 774 semaglutide cases, Wegovy demonstrated the strongest signal for ION (reporting odds ratio (ROR)=74.89) compared with Ozempic (ROR=18.81). Sex-stratified analyses showed higher odds in men (ROR=116.37), and multivariable regression confirmed greater risk with Wegovy versus Ozempic (adjusted OR (AOR)=4.74) and in men versus women (AOR=3.33). These findings highlight a potential dose-dependent safety concern that warrants urgent prospective evaluation to guide prescribing and regulatory policy.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 3 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 3 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Professor > Associate Professor 1 33%
Student > Bachelor 1 33%
Researcher 1 33%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 1 33%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 33%
Unknown 1 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 513. 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 October 2026.
All research outputs
#63,289
of 34,557,610 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of Ophthalmology
#18
of 7,519 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#559
of 360,469 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of Ophthalmology
#1
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,557,610 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,519 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 360,469 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.