↓ Skip to main content

Prospective, randomized, double-blind trial to investigate the efficacy and safety of corneal cross-linking to halt the progression of keratoconus

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Ophthalmology, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
51 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 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
Prospective, randomized, double-blind trial to investigate the efficacy and safety of corneal cross-linking to halt the progression of keratoconus
Published in
BMC Ophthalmology, July 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12886-015-0070-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stefan J. Lang, Elisabeth M. Messmer, Gerd Geerling, Marc J. Mackert, Tobias Brunner, Sylvia Dollak, Borislav Kutchoukov, Daniel Böhringer, Thomas Reinhard, Philip Maier

Abstract

Corneal cross-linking is widely used to treat keratoconus. However, to date, only limited data from randomized trials support its efficacy. The efficacy and safety of corneal cross-linking for halting progression of keratoconus were investigated in a prospective, randomized, blinded, placebo controlled, multicentre trial. Twenty-nine keratoconus patients were randomized in three trial centres. The mean age at inclusion was 28 years. Longitudinal changes in corneal refraction were assessed by linear regression. The best corrected visual acuity, surface defects and corneal inflammation were also assessed. These data were analysed with a multifactorial linear regression model. A total of 15 eyes were randomized to the treatment and 14 to the control group. Follow-up averaged 1098 days. Corneal refractive power decreased on average (+/-standard deviation) by 0.35 +/- 0.58 dioptres/year in the treatment group. The controls showed an increase of 0.11 +/- 0.61 dioptres/year. This difference was statistically significant (p = 0.02). Our data suggest that corneal cross-linking is an effective treatment for some patients to halt the progression of keratoconus. However, some of the treated patients still progressed, whereas some untreated controls improved. Therefore, further investigations are necessary to decide which patients require treatment and which do not. NCT00626717 , Date of registration: February 20, 2008.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 59 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 13 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 17%
Other 7 12%
Researcher 6 10%
Student > Master 6 10%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 11 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 49%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 5%
Unspecified 2 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 14 24%
Attention Score in Context

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 23 July 2015.
All research outputs
#19,292,491
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ophthalmology
#1,612
of 2,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#193,390
of 266,489 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ophthalmology
#28
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,554 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 266,489 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.