↓ Skip to main content

Multifocal intraocular lenses: Relative indications and contraindications for implantation

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery, February 2014
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 (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Readers on

mendeley
236 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
Multifocal intraocular lenses: Relative indications and contraindications for implantation
Published in
Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery, February 2014
DOI 10.1016/j.jcrs.2013.12.011
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

This article presents an extensive overview of best clinical practice pertaining to selection and use of multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) currently available in the United States. Relevant preoperative diagnostic evaluations, patient selection criteria, counseling, and managing expectations are reviewed, as well as how to approach patients with underlying ocular intricacies or challenges and best practices for intraoperative challenges during planned implantation of a multifocal IOL. Managing the unhappy multifocal IOL patient if implantation has been performed is also addressed.

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 236 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 %
Pakistan 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Unknown 233 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 31 13%
Student > Master 24 10%
Researcher 23 10%
Student > Postgraduate 21 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 20 8%
Other 53 22%
Unknown 64 27%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 118 50%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 4%
Physics and Astronomy 8 3%
Engineering 7 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 2%
Other 17 7%
Unknown 72 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 20 January 2026.
All research outputs
#3,522,054
of 34,492,055 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery
#171
of 4,128 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,554
of 375,314 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery
#1
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,492,055 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,128 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 375,314 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 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 97% of its contemporaries.