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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Ascorbic acid concentrations in aqueous humor after systemic vitamin C supplementation in patients with cataract: pilot study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Ophthalmology, July 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12886-017-0515-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Young-Sool Hah, Hye Jin Chung, Sneha B. Sontakke, In-Young Chung, Sunmi Ju, Seong-Wook Seo, Ji-Myong Yoo, Seong-Jae Kim |
| Abstract |
To measure ascorbic acid concentration in aqueous humor of patients with cataract after oral or intravenous vitamin C supplementation. Forty-two eyes of 42 patients with senile cataract who underwent uncomplicated cataract surgery were enrolled. Patients (n = 14 each) were administered oral vitamin C (2 g), intravenous vitamin C (20 g) or no treatment (control group) on the day before surgery. Samples of aqueous humor (0.1 cm(3)) were obtained by anterior chamber aspiration at the beginning of surgery and stored at -80 °C. Ascorbic acid concentration in aqueous humor was measured by high-pressure liquid chromatography. The mean age at surgery was 62.5 years, with no difference among the three groups. The mean ± standard deviation concentrations of ascorbic acid in aqueous humor in the control and oral and intravenous vitamin C groups were 1347 ± 331 μmol/L, 1859 ± 408 μmol/L and 2387 ± 445 μmol/L, respectively. Ascorbic acid concentration was significantly lower in the control than in the oral (P < 0.01) and intravenous (P < 0.001) vitamin C groups and was significantly higher in the intravenous than in the oral vitamin C group (P < 0.05). Ascorbic acid concentration in aqueous humor is increased by systemic vitamin C supplementation, with intravenous administration being more effective than oral administration. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 41 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 7% |
| Professor | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 12% |
| Unknown | 14 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 17% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 7% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Unknown | 19 | 46% |
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 15 November 2022.
All research outputs
#17,998,207
of 23,114,117 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ophthalmology
#1,106
of 2,423 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#224,444
of 312,775 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ophthalmology
#14
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,114,117 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,423 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 312,775 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.