↓ Skip to main content

Presumed topiramate retinopathy: a case report

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Medical Case Reports, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
7 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.
Title
Presumed topiramate retinopathy: a case report
Published in
Journal of Medical Case Reports, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13256-016-0980-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tiffany L. M. Yeung, Patrick S. H. Li, Kenneth K. W. Li

Abstract

We report a case of peripheral pigmentary retinopathy and visual field loss following topiramate use for uncontrolled seizures. Such side effects have not been well documented despite the increasing use of topiramate in the past 10 years. A thorough search of available English literature revealed only a small number of reports of topiramate-induced retinopathy or visual field defects in humans. One similar case has been described. We are concerned about the possible rare instances of this occurrence in future patients and hence would like to propose a presumed correlation. A 48-year-old Chinese woman developed blurred vision after 9 months of topiramate use. Her visual acuity dropped from 1.2 to 0.7 in both eyes, with bilateral diffuse pigmentary retinopathy and a constricted visual field. Despite an improvement in visual acuity after cessation of the drug, the other clinical findings remained. The temporal relationship between the initiation of topiramate and the visual disturbance suggests that topiramate could be the cause of such signs and symptoms. Topiramate potentially causes pigmentary retinopathy and constricted visual field.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 7 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 7 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 3 43%
Unspecified 1 14%
Unknown 3 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 1 14%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 14%
Unknown 4 57%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 16 August 2016.
All research outputs
#8,722,650
of 11,329,665 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Case Reports
#828
of 1,684 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#171,237
of 265,188 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Case Reports
#23
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,329,665 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,684 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 265,188 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.