↓ Skip to main content

A randomized trial of prescribed patching regimens for treatment of severe amblyopia in children

Overview of attention for article published in Ophthalmology, November 2003
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 (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Readers on

mendeley
247 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
A randomized trial of prescribed patching regimens for treatment of severe amblyopia in children
Published in
Ophthalmology, November 2003
DOI 10.1016/j.ophtha.2003.08.001
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

To compare full-time patching (all hours or all but 1 hour per day) to 6 hours of patching per day, as prescribed treatments for severe amblyopia in children younger than 7 years. Prospective, randomized multicenter clinical trial (32 sites). One hundred seventy-five children younger than 7 years with amblyopia in the range of 20/100 to 20/400. Randomization either to full-time patching or to 6 hours of patching per day, each combined with at least 1 hour of near-visual activities during patching. Visual acuity in the amblyopic eye after 4 months. Visual acuity in the amblyopic eye improved a similar amount in both groups. The improvement in the amblyopic eye acuity from baseline to 4 months averaged 4.8 lines in the 6-hour group and 4.7 lines in the full-time group (P = 0.45). Six hours of prescribed daily patching produces an improvement in visual acuity that is of similar magnitude to the improvement produced by prescribed full-time patching in treating severe amblyopia in children 3 to less than 7 years of age.

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 247 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 Kingdom 2 <1%
Russia 1 <1%
Peru 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Unknown 241 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 29 12%
Other 24 10%
Student > Master 22 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 8%
Student > Postgraduate 19 8%
Other 46 19%
Unknown 88 36%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 89 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 27 11%
Psychology 10 4%
Neuroscience 5 2%
Social Sciences 3 1%
Other 16 6%
Unknown 97 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. 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 27 January 2026.
All research outputs
#1,722,903
of 29,400,575 outputs
Outputs from Ophthalmology
#484
of 7,983 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,130
of 66,704 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ophthalmology
#1
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 29,400,575 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,983 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 66,704 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 96% 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 97% of its contemporaries.