↓ Skip to main content

Evaluation of the retinal ganglion cell and choroidal thickness in young Turkish adults with hyperopic anisometropic amblyopia

Overview of attention for article published in International Ophthalmology, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 Mendeley
Title
Evaluation of the retinal ganglion cell and choroidal thickness in young Turkish adults with hyperopic anisometropic amblyopia
Published in
International Ophthalmology, December 2015
DOI 10.1007/s10792-015-0157-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Erkan Celik, Burçin Çakır, Elif Betul Turkoglu, Emine Doğan, Gursoy Alagoz

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to compare the choroidal thickness (CT) and ganglion cell complex (GCC) thickness of the normal fellow eyes and the amblyopic eyes using enhanced depth imaging optical coherence tomography (EDI-OCT) in young Turkish adults with hyperopic anisometropic amblyopia. Patients with unilateral hyperopic anisometropic amblyopia were enrolled and underwent a full ophthalmological assessment, including best-corrected visual acuity, cycloplegic refraction, and axial length (AL) measurements. Cirrus EDI-OCT was used to obtain subfoveal CT, GCC thickness, retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL), and central macular thickness (CMT) measurements. Comparison was performed between the amblyopic eyes and the normal fellow eyes. Forty-three hyperopic anisometropic amblyopic patients were enrolled in this study. Mean age of 23 female and 20 male patients was 24.8 ± 7.4 years. Mean AL was 21.9 ± 1.3 and 22.4 ± 0.9 mm in amblyopic and fellow eyes, respectively (P < 0.05). Mean subfoveal CT measurements were 325.4 ± 44.2 and 317.9 ± 42.7 µ in amblyopic and fellow eyes, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between the groups (P > 0.05). Mean GCC thickness was 83.8 ± 3.6 µ in amblyopic eyes and 83.5 ± 3.9 µ in the fellow eyes. Statistically significant difference was not seen between the groups (P > 0.05). Mean RNFL and mean CMT measurements were also similar in two groups (P > 0.05). Subfoveal CT, CMT, RNFL, and GCC thickness measurements were not statistically significant between hyperopic anisometropic amblyopic eyes and normal fellow eyes.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 21%
Other 2 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 14%
Professor 1 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Unknown 4 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 57%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 7%
Unknown 4 29%
Attention Score in Context

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 December 2015.
All research outputs
#18,431,664
of 22,834,308 outputs
Outputs from International Ophthalmology
#536
of 1,033 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#279,721
of 387,568 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Ophthalmology
#5
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,834,308 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,033 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 387,568 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.