↓ Skip to main content

Atropine for the Prevention of Myopia Progression in Children A Report by the American Academy of Ophthalmology

Overview of attention for article published in Ophthalmology, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
10 news outlets
twitter
7 X users
patent
2 patents
facebook
4 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
112 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
196 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.
Title
Atropine for the Prevention of Myopia Progression in Children A Report by the American Academy of Ophthalmology
Published in
Ophthalmology, June 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.ophtha.2017.05.032
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stacy L Pineles, Raymond T Kraker, Deborah K VanderVeen, Amy K Hutchinson, Jennifer A Galvin, Lorri B Wilson, Scott R Lambert

Abstract

To review the published literature on the efficacy of topical atropine for the prevention of myopic progression in children. Literature searches were last conducted in December 2016 in the PubMed database with no date restrictions, but were limited to studies published in English, and in the Cochrane Library database without any restrictions. The combined searches yielded 98 citations, 23 of which were reviewed in full text. Of these, 17 articles were deemed appropriate for inclusion in this assessment and subsequently were assigned a level of evidence rating by the panel methodologist. Seventeen level I, II, and III studies were identified. Most of the studies reported less myopic progression in children treated with atropine compared with various control groups. All 8 of the level I and II studies that evaluated primarily myopic progression revealed less myopic progression with atropine (myopic progression ranging from 0.04±0.63 to 0.47±0.91 diopters (D)/year) compared with control participants (myopic progression ranging from 0.38±0.39 to 1.19±2.48 D/year). In studies that evaluated myopic progression after cessation of treatment, a rebound effect was noted. Several studies evaluated the optimal dosage of atropine with regard to myopic progression, rebound after treatment cessation, and minimization of side effects. Lower dosages of atropine (0.5%, 0.1%, and 0.01%) were found to be slightly less effective during treatment periods of 1 to 2 years, but they were associated with less rebound myopic progression (for atropine 0.01%, mean myopic progression after treatment cessation of 0.28±0.33 D/year, compared with atropine 0.5%, 0.87±0.52 D/year), fewer side effects, and similar long-term results for myopic progression after the study period and rebound effect were considered. The most robust and well-designed studies were carried out in Asian populations. Studies involving patients of other ethnic backgrounds failed to provide sufficient evidence of an effect of atropine on myopic progression. Level I evidence supports the use of atropine to prevent myopic progression. Although there are reports of myopic rebound after treatment is discontinued, this seems to be minimized by using low doses (especially atropine 0.01%).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 196 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 196 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 11%
Student > Postgraduate 21 11%
Other 14 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 6%
Other 49 25%
Unknown 65 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 74 38%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 10%
Neuroscience 5 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 2%
Chemistry 3 2%
Other 17 9%
Unknown 73 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 82. 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 31 January 2024.
All research outputs
#518,738
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Ophthalmology
#154
of 6,764 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,029
of 328,273 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ophthalmology
#5
of 94 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,764 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 328,273 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 94 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 94% of its contemporaries.