| Title |
Effectiveness of binocularity-stimulating treatment in children with residual amblyopia following occlusion
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Ophthalmology, September 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12886-018-0922-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Haeng-Jin Lee, Seong-Joon Kim |
| Abstract |
To evaluate the effectiveness of binocularity-stimulating treatment in children with residual amblyopia following occlusion therapy for more than 6 months. Of patients with amblyopia caused by anisometropia and/or strabismus, patients with residual amblyopia following more than 6 months of occlusion therapy were included. Subjects underwent one of the following types of binocularity-stimulating therapy: Bangerter foil (BF), head-mounted display (HMD) game, or BF/HMD combination (BF + HMD). Factors including age, sex, types of amblyopia, visual acuity, and duration of treatment were investigated. Baseline and final (after at least 2 months of treatment) visual acuity were also compared. Twenty-two patients with a mean age of 8.7 ± 1.3 years were included. Seven patients had anisometropic amblyopia, 8 patients had strabismic amblyopia, and 7 patients had combined amblyopia. After 4.4 ± 1.8 months of treatment, logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) visual acuity in the amblyopic eye improved from 0.22 ± 0.20 to 0.18 ± 0.15. Five of 22 patients (22.7%) gained more than 0.2 logMAR, including 1 of 10 patients (10.0%) in the BF group, 2 of 7 patients (28.6%) in the HMD group, and 2 of 5 patients (40.0%) in the BF + HMD group. No significant differences in clinical characteristics were identified among the three groups. Binocularity-stimulating therapy is somewhat beneficial in children with residual amblyopia and might be attempted when children no longer benefit from sufficient long-term period of occlusion therapy. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 66 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 8 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 8% |
| Researcher | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 8 | 12% |
| Unknown | 27 | 41% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 14% |
| Neuroscience | 5 | 8% |
| Psychology | 3 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 8% |
| Unknown | 31 | 47% |
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 24 October 2018.
All research outputs
#16,099,609
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ophthalmology
#892
of 2,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#219,398
of 343,875 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ophthalmology
#15
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 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 2,554 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 343,875 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 34 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 50% of its contemporaries.