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 |
A systematic review on ‘Foveal Crowding’ in visually impaired children and perceptual learning as a method to reduce Crowding
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Ophthalmology, July 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2415-12-27 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Bianca Huurneman, F Nienke Boonstra, Ralf FA Cox, Antonius HN Cillessen, Ger van Rens |
| Abstract |
This systematic review gives an overview of foveal crowding (the inability to recognize objects due to surrounding nearby contours in foveal vision) and possible interventions. Foveal crowding can have a major effect on reading rate and deciphering small pieces of information from busy visual scenes. Three specific groups experience more foveal crowding than adults with normal vision (NV): 1) children with NV, 2) visually impaired (VI) children and adults and 3) children with cerebral visual impairment (CVI). The extent and magnitude of foveal crowding as well as interventions aimed at reducing crowding were investigated in this review. The twofold goal of this review is : [A] to compare foveal crowding in children with NV, VI children and adults and CVI children and [B] to compare interventions to reduce crowding. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 50% |
| Brazil | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 98 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Portugal | 1 | 1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 1% |
| India | 1 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 93 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 18 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 17 | 17% |
| Researcher | 11 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 7% |
| Other | 22 | 22% |
| Unknown | 15 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 25 | 26% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 19% |
| Neuroscience | 10 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 7% |
| Unspecified | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 14 | 14% |
| Unknown | 18 | 18% |
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 02 March 2013.
All research outputs
#15,248,503
of 22,673,450 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ophthalmology
#798
of 2,304 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,348
of 164,301 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ophthalmology
#9
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,673,450 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,304 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 164,301 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.