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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Intravitreal ranibizumab for choroidal neovascularization in a patient with angioid streaks and multiple evanescent white dots
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Ophthalmology, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12886-016-0307-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alfredo Pece, Davide Allegrini, Stelios Kontadakis, Giuseppe Querques, Luca Rossetti |
| Abstract |
To report a patient with angioid streaks (ASs) and coincident multiple evanescent white dot syndrome (MEWDS) who developed choroidal neovascularization (CNV). A 20-year-old woman presented with reduced vision (20/100) in her left eye (LE). Based on a complete ophthalmologic examination the patient was diagnosed with ASs and coincident MEWDS. Two weeks later best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) improved up to 20/25 and the MEWDS findings almost disappeared. Two months later BCVA dropped again (20/100) due to the development of CNV which was treated by a single intravitreal injection of ranibizumab (0.5 mg/0.05 mL). One month after this BCVA improved up to 20/40, and there was regression of the CNV. There was no need for retreatment at the last follow-up visit, 1 year after the ranibizumab injection, when the patient showed further recovery of BCVA up to 20/25. In this case of ASs, MEWDS completely resolved after 2 weeks, but 2 months later CNV developed. A single intravitreal injection of ranibizumab had a long-lasting effect. Larger series are necessary to clarify the pathogenesis of CNV in such cases and the role of intravitreal ranibizumab. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 9 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 9 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 2 | 22% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 11% |
| Professor | 1 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 11% |
| Researcher | 1 | 11% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 3 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 44% |
| Psychology | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 4 | 44% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 27 July 2016.
All research outputs
#18,466,238
of 22,881,154 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ophthalmology
#1,543
of 2,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#281,792
of 365,298 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ophthalmology
#24
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,881,154 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,359 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 365,298 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.