↓ Skip to main content

Interventions for asymptomatic retinal breaks and lattice degeneration for preventing retinal detachment

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2014
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 (79th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
77 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
Interventions for asymptomatic retinal breaks and lattice degeneration for preventing retinal detachment
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd003170.pub4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Charles P Wilkinson

Abstract

Asymptomatic retinal breaks and lattice degeneration are visible lesions that are risk factors for later retinal detachment. Retinal detachments occur when fluid in the vitreous cavity passes through tears or holes in the retina and separates the retina from the underlying retinal pigment epithelium. Creation of an adhesion surrounding retinal breaks and lattice degeneration, with laser photocoagulation or cryotherapy, has been recommended as an effective means of preventing retinal detachment. This therapy is of value in the management of retinal tears associated with the symptoms of flashes and floaters and persistent vitreous traction upon the retina in the region of the retinal break, because such symptomatic retinal tears are associated with a high rate of progression to retinal detachment. Retinal tears and holes unassociated with acute symptoms and lattice degeneration are significantly less likely to be the sites of retinal breaks that are responsible for later retinal detachment. Nevertheless, treatment of these lesions frequently is recommended, in spite of the fact that the effectiveness of this therapy is unproven.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters 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 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Netherlands 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 74 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 12 16%
Researcher 10 13%
Other 10 13%
Student > Master 10 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 12%
Other 26 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 54 70%
Unspecified 9 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Psychology 3 4%
Other 4 5%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 August 2019.
All research outputs
#3,092,320
of 13,577,074 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,652
of 10,640 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,460
of 201,412 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#142
of 223 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,577,074 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 77th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,640 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.1. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 201,412 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 223 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.