↓ Skip to main content

Effect of glucosamine on intraocular pressure: a randomized clinical trial

Overview of attention for article published in Eye, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 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
Effect of glucosamine on intraocular pressure: a randomized clinical trial
Published in
Eye, October 2016
DOI 10.1038/eye.2016.221
Pubmed ID
Authors

H Esfandiari, M Pakravan, Z Zakeri, S Ziaie, P Pakravan, V Ownagh

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of the study was to investigate ocular hypertensive effect of exogenous glucosamine in comparison with placebo in patients with osteoarthritis.Patients and methodsIn this double-masked randomized clinical trial, 88 patients with osteoarthritis were included. Forty-four patients were randomized into either glucosamine sulfate or the placebo group.Comprehensive ophthalmologic exam including intraocular pressure (IOP) at baseline, month 1, and 3 was performed. Ocular response analyzer parameters were also checked at baseline and month 3.ResultsThe mean IOP at the time of presentation was 12.4±2.7 mm Hg in glucosamine and 13±2.8 mm Hg in the placebo group (P=0.329). At month 1 the corresponding values were 12.6±2.4 and 12.9±2.4 mm Hg (P=0.868), and at 3 months follow-up were 13.5±2.3 and 13±2.7 mm Hg (P=0.002), respectively. About 34.1% in treatment and 12.5% in the placebo group had clinically significant (defined as ≥ 2 mm Hg) rise in IOP at final follow-up (P=0.023). Mean age in those with significant rise in IOP was 66 vs 57.7 years in patients with <2 mm Hg (P=0.034). The ORA parameters remained unchanged in both the groups during the course of study.ConclusionGlucosamine supplement therapy causes statistically significant rise of IOP, which is more pronounced in elderly patients. Clinical implication of this finding needs further evaluation.Eye advance online publication, 21 October 2016; doi:10.1038/eye.2016.221.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 42 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 14%
Researcher 5 12%
Student > Master 4 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 7%
Student > Postgraduate 3 7%
Other 7 17%
Unknown 14 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 26%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 15 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 July 2023.
All research outputs
#6,600,747
of 24,662,675 outputs
Outputs from Eye
#831
of 4,598 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#94,364
of 322,539 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Eye
#14
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,662,675 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,598 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 322,539 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 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 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 71% of its contemporaries.