| Title |
Radiation-Induced Cataractogenesis: A Critical Literature Review for the Interventional Radiologist
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology, September 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00270-015-1207-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kevin F. Seals, Edward W. Lee, Christopher H. Cagnon, Ramsey A. Al-Hakim, Stephen T. Kee |
| Abstract |
Extensive research supports an association between radiation exposure and cataractogenesis. New data suggests that radiation-induced cataracts may form stochastically, without a threshold and at low radiation doses. We first review data linking cataractogenesis with interventional work. We then analyze the lens dose typical of various procedures, factors modulating dose, and predicted annual dosages. We conclude by critically evaluating the literature describing techniques for lens protection, finding that leaded eyeglasses may offer inadequate protection and exploring the available data on alternative strategies for cataract prevention. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 6 | 60% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 20% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 40% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 40% |
| Scientists | 1 | 10% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| South Africa | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 70 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 12 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 14% |
| Researcher | 7 | 10% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 20 | 28% |
| Unknown | 8 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 26 | 36% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 17% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 11 | 15% |
| Unspecified | 4 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Unknown | 11 | 15% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 15 November 2018.
All research outputs
#4,730,854
of 23,923,403 outputs
Outputs from CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology
#261
of 2,508 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,027
of 278,242 outputs
Outputs of similar age from CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology
#4
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,923,403 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,508 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 278,242 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
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 has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.