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 |
Spontaneous resolution of foveal detachment in traction maculopathy in high myopia unrelated to posterior vitreous detachment
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Ophthalmology, February 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12886-016-0195-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tso-Ting Lai, Tzyy-Chang Ho, Chung-May Yang |
| Abstract |
Foveal detachment associated with foveoschisis usually takes a progressive course, and is associated with a poor visual outcome. The purpose of this study was to report the spontaneous resolution of foveal detachment in patients with myopic traction maculopathy without posterior vitreous detachment. A retrospective study involving eight cases of high myopia with foveoschisis and foveal detachment in which the subfoveal fluid had spontaneously resolved. The clinical characteristics and optical coherence tomography (OCT) findings were described. All cases involved predominant schisis in the outer retina, with six showing internal limiting membrane detachment. The average central foveal thickness was 445.1 μm, and the average foveal detachment height was 271.5 μm. None of the cases involved traction of the vitreomacular interface or posterior vitreous detachment (PVD), either before or after the resolution of foveal detachment. In seven cases, the mean best-corrected visual acuity improved after foveal reattachment. Spontaneous reattachment not associated with PVD can occur in cases of high myopic traction maculopathy, especially in those without obvious vitreomacular traction. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 22 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 14% |
| Other | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 9% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 18% |
| Unknown | 7 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 45% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 9 | 41% |
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 13 February 2016.
All research outputs
#20,306,690
of 22,846,662 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ophthalmology
#2,086
of 2,349 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#337,055
of 400,570 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ophthalmology
#15
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,846,662 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 2,349 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 400,570 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 19 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.