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 |
Exposure of haptic of posterior chamber intraocular lens after sutureless intrascleral fixation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Ophthalmology, August 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12886-015-0102-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yoshitsugu Matsui, Hisashi Matsubara, Tsukasa Hanemoto, Mineo Kondo |
| Abstract |
A technique of sutureless intrascleral fixation of an intraocular lens (IOL) in an eye that lacks a posterior capsular support has been reported. The advantage of this technique was that the suture-related complications did not develop. However, the long-term complications of a sutureless IOL implantation have not been reported. A 75-years-old man had a sutureless intrascleral fixation (Y-fixation) of an IOL 4 months before our examination. The nasal haptic became exposed and the temporal haptic was seen in the subconjunctiva. The tilted IOL was removed and replaced by a posterior chamber IOL that was sutured to the sclera. At the 6 months examination, the eye was quiet and the IOL was stable. We suggest that the exposure of the nasal haptic of an IOL that was implanted by sutureless intrascleral fixation (Y-fixation) was due to poor surgical technique and/or the erosion of a fragile sclera. Thus, eyes should be carefully and frequently monitored after sutureless intrascleral posterior chamber IOL implantation. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 32 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 5 | 16% |
| Researcher | 5 | 16% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 7 | 22% |
| Unknown | 7 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 53% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 13% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 7 | 22% |
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 14 August 2015.
All research outputs
#20,286,650
of 22,821,814 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ophthalmology
#2,083
of 2,346 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#221,650
of 264,379 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ophthalmology
#27
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,821,814 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,346 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 264,379 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.