↓ Skip to main content

Corticosteroids as adjuvant therapy for ocular toxoplasmosis

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 tweeter
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
90 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
Corticosteroids as adjuvant therapy for ocular toxoplasmosis
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2017
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd007417.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Smitha Jasper, Satyanarayana S Vedula, Sheeja S John, Saban Horo, Yasir J Sepah, Quan Dong Nguyen

Abstract

Ocular infection caused by Toxoplasma gondii, a parasite, may result in inflammation in the retina, choroid, and uvea, and consequently lead to complications such as glaucoma, cataract, and posterior synechiae. The objective of this systematic review was to assess the effects of adjunctive use of corticosteroids to anti-parasitic therapy versus anti-parasitic therapy alone for ocular toxoplasmosis. We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register (2016; Issue 11)), MEDLINE Ovid, Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, MEDLINE Ovid Daily (January 1946 to December 2016), Embase (January 1980 to December 2016), Latin American and Caribbean Literature on Health Sciences (LILACS (January 1982 to December 2016)), the ISRCTN registry (www.isrctn.com/editAdvancedSearch), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov), and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP; www.who.int/ictrp/search/en). We used no date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. We last searched the electronic databases on 7 December 2016. We had planned to include randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials. Eligible trials would have enrolled participants of any age who were immunocompetent and were diagnosed with acute ocular toxoplasmosis. Included trials would have compared anti-parasitic therapy plus corticosteroids versus anti-parasitic therapy alone, different doses or times of initiation of corticosteroids. Two authors independently screened titles and abstracts retrieved through the electronic searches. We retrieved full-text reports of studies categorized as 'unsure' or 'include' after we reviewed the abstracts. Two authors independently reviewed each full-text report for eligibility. Discrepancies were resolved through discussion. We identified no completed or ongoing trial that was eligible for this Cochrane review. Although research has identified a wide variation in practice regarding the use of corticosteroids, our review did not identify any evidence from randomized controlled trials for or against the role of corticosteroids in the management of ocular toxoplasmosis. Several questions remain unanswered by well-conducted randomized trials in this context, including whether the use of corticosteroids as an adjunctive agent is more effective than the use of anti-parasitic therapy alone; if so, when corticosteroids should be initiated in the treatment regimen (early versus late course of treatment), and what would be the best dose and duration of steroid use.

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 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 90 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 19%
Student > Bachelor 11 12%
Student > Postgraduate 7 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 7%
Researcher 6 7%
Other 19 21%
Unknown 24 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 4%
Other 8 9%
Unknown 32 36%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 31 January 2020.
All research outputs
#3,204,712
of 16,722,463 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,916
of 11,578 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,837
of 362,269 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#129
of 217 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,722,463 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,578 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 24.4. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 362,269 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 217 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.