↓ Skip to main content

Types of intraocular lenses for cataract surgery in eyes with uveitis

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
197 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
Types of intraocular lenses for cataract surgery in eyes with uveitis
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd007284.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Theresa G Leung, Kristina Lindsley, Irene C Kuo

Abstract

Cataract formation often occurs in people with uveitis. It is unclear which intraocular lens (IOL) type is optimal for use in cataract surgery for eyes with uveitis.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 197 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 195 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 25 13%
Student > Bachelor 25 13%
Student > Master 24 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 7%
Other 12 6%
Other 34 17%
Unknown 63 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 67 34%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 4%
Engineering 7 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 3%
Other 27 14%
Unknown 68 35%
Attention Score in Context

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 10 January 2017.
All research outputs
#7,865,700
of 26,794,081 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#9,052
of 13,278 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,693
of 237,573 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#174
of 241 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,794,081 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,278 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 34.0. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 237,573 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 241 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.