| Title |
3-Year follow-up after Lasik: assessing the risk factors for retreatment
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Ophthalmology, May 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10792-015-0084-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jorge E. Valdez-García, Julio C. Hernandez-Camarena, Rosa Martínez-Muñoz |
| Abstract |
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the correlation of important risk factors for LASIK retreatment and the retreatment rate. A retrospective cohort study was conducted. Records of patients who underwent LASIK between January 2011 and January 2012 at the Zambrano-Hellion Medical Center, Tec de Monterrey (México), and posteriorly underwent LASIK retreatment were identified and risk factors to receive retreatment were assessed using relative risk. Main outcomes were retreatment rate, risk factors for retreatment, and uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA). 482 eyes from 241 patients were available for a 36-month follow-up analysis. 68.5 % had primary myopic LASIK; 37 % were ≤2 diopters (D), 52 % were >2 and <6 D, and 11 % were ≥6 D of myopia. 31.5 % of the eyes had hyperopic LASIK. Retreatment was performed in 6.85 % eyes. Myopia >6 D (RR 4.13), hyperopic refraction (RR 3.18), and age >40 (RR 3.07) were the most important risk factors for retreatment (P = 0.004, P = 0.007, P = 0.006, respectively). UDVA was ≥20/40 in 92.1 % and ≥20/20 in 81.6 % of the retreated eyes and 82 % of the eyes within ±0.50 D of target refraction. Increasing degrees of myopia, followed by hyperopic refraction, and age were the most important associated factors to retreatment. LASIK retreatment was safe and effective. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 25 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 20% |
| Other | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 5 | 20% |
| Unknown | 6 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 60% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 4% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 7 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 March 2022.
All research outputs
#7,416,796
of 23,339,727 outputs
Outputs from International Ophthalmology
#118
of 1,056 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#87,608
of 267,465 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Ophthalmology
#1
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,339,727 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,056 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 267,465 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 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 95% of its contemporaries.