↓ Skip to main content

Goldmann applanation tonometry error relative to true intracameral intraocular pressure in vitro and in vivo

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Ophthalmology, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
6 X users
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 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
Goldmann applanation tonometry error relative to true intracameral intraocular pressure in vitro and in vivo
Published in
BMC Ophthalmology, November 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12886-017-0608-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sean McCafferty, Jason Levine, Jim Schwiegerling, Eniko T. Enikov

Abstract

Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) error relative to intracameral intraocular pressure (IOP) has not been examined comparatively in both human cadaver eyes and in live human eyes. Futhermore, correlations to biomechanical corneal properties and positional changes have not been examined directly to intracameral IOP and GAT IOP. Intracameral IOP was measured via pressure transducer on fifty-eight (58) eyes undergoing cataract surgery and the IOP was modulated manometrically on each patient alternately to 10, 20, and 40 mmHg. IOP was measured using a Perkins tonometer in the supine position on 58 eyes and upright on a subset of 8 eyes. Twenty one (21) fresh human cadaver globes were Intracamerally IOP adjusted and measured via pressure transducer. Intracameral IOP ranged between 5 and 60 mmHg. IOP was measured in the upright position with a Goldmann Applanation Tonometer (GAT) and supine position with a Perkins tonometer. Central corneal thickness (CCT) was also measured. The Goldmann-type tonometer error measured on live human eyes was 5.2 +/-1.6 mmHg lower than intracameral IOP in the upright position and 7.9 +/- 2.3 mmHg lower in the supine position (p < .05). CCT also indicated a sloped correlation to error (correlation coeff. = 0.18). Cadaver eye IOP measurements were 3.1+/-2.5 mmHg lower than intracameral IOP in the upright position and 5.4+/- 3.1 mmHg in the supine position (p < .05). Goldmann IOP measures significantly lower than true intracameral IOP by approximately 3 mmHg in vitro and 5 mmHg in vivo. The Goldmann IOP error is increased an additional 2.8 mmHg lower in the supine position. CCT appears to significantly affect the error by up to 4 mmHg over the sample size.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 28 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 11%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 7%
Student > Master 2 7%
Student > Bachelor 1 4%
Other 6 21%
Unknown 12 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 29%
Engineering 2 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Unspecified 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 15 54%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 06 June 2023.
All research outputs
#1,999,869
of 24,380,426 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ophthalmology
#72
of 2,622 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,857
of 446,897 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ophthalmology
#3
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,380,426 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,622 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 446,897 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.