↓ Skip to main content

Use of corneal cross-linking beyond keratoconus: a systemic literature review

Overview of attention for article published in Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, March 2023
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 (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 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
Use of corneal cross-linking beyond keratoconus: a systemic literature review
Published in
Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, March 2023
DOI 10.1007/s00417-023-05994-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Richard P. C. Manns, Asaf Achiron, Boris Knyazer, Omar Elhaddad, Kieran Darcy, Tal Yahalomi, Derek Tole, Venkata S. Avadhanam

Abstract

The success of corneal collagen cross-linking in altering keratoconus' clinical course has driven a search for further uses of this procedure. This literature review aims to analyze the scientific evidence available for the benefit of cross-linking in the management of ophthalmic diseases other than progressive keratoconus or ectasia induced by corneal refractive procedures. A systemic literature review. We reviewed 97 studies. We found that collagen cross-linking can limit the progression of several other corneal ectasias, thus reducing and limiting the need for keratoplasty. Collagen cross-linking also can reduce the refractive power of the cornea and can be considered for a moderate degree of bacterial keratitis or when the organism is unidentified, which is refractive to antibiotics alone. However, the comparative rarity of these procedures has limited the extent of evidence. In fungal, Acanthamoeba, and herpes virus keratitis, the evidence is inconclusive of the safety and efficacy of cross-linking. Current clinical data is limited, and laboratory data has not fully correlated with published clinical data.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 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 %
Unspecified 1 14%
Researcher 1 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 14%
Unknown 4 57%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 2 29%
Unspecified 1 14%
Unknown 4 57%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 December 2023.
All research outputs
#4,356,966
of 25,988,468 outputs
Outputs from Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology
#155
of 1,135 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#80,042
of 429,374 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,988,468 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,135 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 429,374 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them