↓ Skip to main content

A pilot study for development of a novel tool for clinical decision making to identify fallers among ophthalmic patients

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
64 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
A pilot study for development of a novel tool for clinical decision making to identify fallers among ophthalmic patients
Published in
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/1472-6947-15-s3-s6
Pubmed ID
Authors

P Melillo, A Orrico, M Attanasio, S Rossi, L Pecchia, F Chirico, F Testa, F Simonelli

Abstract

Falls in the elderly is a major problem. Although falls have a multifactorial etiology, a commonly cited cause of falls in older people is poor vision. This study proposes a method to discriminate fallers and non-fallers among ophthalmic patients, based on data-mining algorithms applied to health and socio-demographic information. A group of 150 subjects aged 55 years and older, recruited at the Eye Clinic of the Second University of Naples, underwent a baseline ophthalmic examination and a standardized questionnaire, including lifestyles, general health, social engagement and eyesight problems. A subject who reported at least one fall within one year was considered as faller, otherwise as non-faller. Different tree-based data-mining algorithms (i.e., C4.5, Adaboost and Random Forest) were used to develop automatic classifiers and their performances were evaluated by assessing the receiver-operator characteristics curve estimated with the 10-fold-crossvalidation approach. The best predictive model, based on Random Forest, enabled to identify fallers with a sensitivity and specificity rate of 72.6% and 77.9%, respectively. The most informative variables were: intraocular pressure, best corrected visual acuity and the answers to the total difficulty score of the Activities of Daily Vision Scale (a questionnaire for the measurement of visual disability). The current study confirmed that some ophthalmic features (i.e. cataract surgery, lower intraocular pressure values) could be associated with a lower fall risk among visually impaired subjects. Finally, automatic analysis of a combination of visual function parameters (either self-evaluated either by ophthalmological tests) and other health information, by data-mining algorithms, could be a feasible tool for identifying fallers among ophthalmic patients.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 63 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 10 16%
Researcher 7 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 11%
Professor 5 8%
Other 4 6%
Other 13 20%
Unknown 18 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 17%
Social Sciences 3 5%
Psychology 3 5%
Engineering 2 3%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 23 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 01 July 2016.
All research outputs
#14,239,950
of 22,830,751 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#1,102
of 1,989 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#138,343
of 267,774 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#24
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,830,751 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,989 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 267,774 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.