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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Interventions for recurrent corneal erosions
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd001861.pub3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Stephanie L Watson, Ming-Han H Lee, Nigel H Barker |
| Abstract |
Recurrent corneal erosion is a common cause of disabling ocular symptoms and predisposes the cornea to infection. It may follow corneal trauma. Measures to prevent the development of recurrent corneal erosion following corneal trauma have not been firmly established. Once recurrent corneal erosion develops simple medical therapy (standard treatment) may lead to resolution of the episode. However, some patients continue to suffer when such therapy fails and once resolved further episodes of recurrent erosion may occur. A number of treatment and prophylactic options are then available but there is no agreement as to the best option. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 3% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 1% |
| India | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 72 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 14 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 9 | 12% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 13 | 17% |
| Unknown | 12 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 41 | 54% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 4% |
| Psychology | 3 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 7 | 9% |
| Unknown | 17 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 December 2018.
All research outputs
#7,185,763
of 22,712,476 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8,767
of 12,313 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,376
of 168,595 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#153
of 226 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,712,476 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,313 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.3. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 168,595 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 226 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.