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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Radiation and cataract.
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Radiation Protection Dosimetry, July 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1093/rpd/ncr299 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Madan M Rehani, Eliseo Vano, Olivera Ciraj-Bjelac, Norman J Kleiman |
| Abstract |
When this paper was about to go to press, the International Commission on Radiological Protection released a statement recommending a change in the threshold dose for the eye lens and dose limits for eye for occupationally exposed persons. It is clear that the earlier published threshold for radiation cataract is no longer valid. Epidemiological studies among Chernobyl clean-up workers, A bomb survivors, astronauts, residents of contaminated buildings, radiological technicians and recent surveys of staff in interventional rooms indicate that there is an increased incidence of lens opacities at doses below 1 Gy. Nevertheless, eye lens dosimetry is at a primitive stage and needs to be developed further. Despite uncertainties concerning dose threshold and dosimetry, it is possible to significantly reduce the risk of radiation cataract through the use of appropriate eye protection. By increasing awareness among those at risk and better adoption and increased usage of protective measures, radiation cataract can become preventable despite lowering of dose limits. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 1% |
| South Africa | 1 | 1% |
| India | 1 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Belgium | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 74 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 13% |
| Researcher | 9 | 11% |
| Other | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 18 | 23% |
| Unknown | 18 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 25% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 16 | 20% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 8% |
| Engineering | 6 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 4% |
| Unknown | 23 | 29% |
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 07 May 2021.
All research outputs
#6,930,372
of 22,725,280 outputs
Outputs from Radiation Protection Dosimetry
#219
of 1,272 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,387
of 116,944 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Radiation Protection Dosimetry
#3
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,725,280 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,272 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 116,944 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 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.