↓ Skip to main content

Optic Nerve Head and Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Analysis A Report by the American Academy of Ophthalmology

Overview of attention for article published in Ophthalmology, October 2007
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
patent
4 patents
guideline
1 clinical guideline source

Readers on

mendeley
111 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.
Article details
Title
Optic Nerve Head and Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Analysis A Report by the American Academy of Ophthalmology
Published in
Ophthalmology, October 2007
DOI 10.1016/j.ophtha.2007.07.005
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

To evaluate the current published literature on the use of optic nerve head (ONH) and retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) measurement devices in diagnosing open-angle glaucoma and detecting progression. A search of peer-reviewed literature was conducted on February 15, 2006 in PubMed and the Cochrane Library for the period January 2003 to February 2006. The search was limited to studies of adults in English-language journals and yielded 442 citations. The panel reviewed the abstracts of these articles and selected 159 articles of possible clinical relevance for review. Of these 159 full-text articles, 82 were determined to be relevant for the first author and methodologist to review and rate according to the quality of evidence. There were no studies classified as having the highest level of evidence (level I). The ONH and RNFL imaging instruments reviewed in this assessment were determined to be highly effective in distinguishing eyes with glaucomatous visual field (VF) loss from normal eyes without VF loss, based on level II evidence. In addition, some studies demonstrated that parameters from ONH or RNFL imaging predicted the development of VF defects among glaucoma suspects. Studies on detecting glaucoma progression showed that although there was often agreement on progression between the structural and functional (VF) tests, a significant proportion of glaucoma patients progressed by either the structural or the functional test alone. The ONH and RNFL imaging devices provide quantitative information for the clinician. Based on studies that have compared the various available technologies directly, there is no single imaging device that outperforms the others in distinguishing patients with glaucoma from controls. Ongoing advances in imaging and related software, as well as the impracticalities associated with obtaining and assessing optic nerve stereophotographs, have made imaging increasingly important in many practice settings. The information obtained from imaging devices is useful in clinical practice when analyzed in conjunction with other relevant parameters that define glaucoma diagnosis and progression.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 111 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 108 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 13%
Student > Master 14 13%
Researcher 12 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 9%
Other 8 7%
Other 20 18%
Unknown 33 30%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 43 39%
Engineering 7 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 5%
Computer Science 5 5%
Other 13 12%
Unknown 33 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 12 November 2020.
All research outputs
#3,186,584
of 27,969,864 outputs
Outputs from Ophthalmology
#1,083
of 7,513 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,271
of 94,353 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ophthalmology
#3
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,969,864 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,513 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 94,353 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 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 91% of its contemporaries.