↓ Skip to main content

Where does selective laser trabeculoplasty stand now? A review

Overview of attention for article published in Eye and Vision, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#50 of 214)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

3 tweeters


12 Dimensions

Readers on

35 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.
Where does selective laser trabeculoplasty stand now? A review
Published in
Eye and Vision, April 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40662-016-0041-y
Pubmed ID

Myrjam De Keyser, Maya De Belder, Simon De Belder, Veva De Groot


Chronic treatment of glaucoma can present a challenge in patients who lack the means and/or the discipline to use daily glaucoma medication. We wondered if selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT) could be a useful alternative. controlled trials comparing efficacy of SLT in adult patients with any form of open angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension and case reports on side effects of SLT. Two recent meta-analyses identified eight randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing the effect of SLT with medication (prostaglandin analogs) and with argon laser trabeculoplasty (ALT). We took these eight RCTs as reference base and calculated their success rates where they were not given. Other articles were added to elaborate on technique and side effects. Mean intraocular pressure (IOP) reduction after SLT was 3.8-8.0 mmHg after 6 months to 1 year. Mean success rate of SLT at 6 months to 1 year is 55-82 %. Higher IOP before laser predicts a higher IOP-lowering effect. In terms of mean IOP reduction, reduction in number of medications and treatment success, the effect of SLT was found to show no clinically relevant difference from that of contemporary medication (prostaglandin analogs) and from ALT. The evidence indicates that SLT is an efficacious primary or adjunctive therapy for treating glaucoma.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 1 3%
Unknown 34 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 6 17%
Student > Postgraduate 6 17%
Student > Bachelor 5 14%
Professor 4 11%
Student > Master 4 11%
Other 6 17%
Unknown 4 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 69%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Computer Science 1 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Sports and Recreations 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 6 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 30 September 2017.
All research outputs
of 21,446,675 outputs
Outputs from Eye and Vision
of 214 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 395,160 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Eye and Vision
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,446,675 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 214 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its peers.
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 395,160 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 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them