↓ Skip to main content

Pain and stress assessment after retinopathy of prematurity screening examination: Indirect ophthalmoscopy versus digital retinal imaging

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pediatrics, August 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
47 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
80 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
Pain and stress assessment after retinopathy of prematurity screening examination: Indirect ophthalmoscopy versus digital retinal imaging
Published in
BMC Pediatrics, August 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2431-12-132
Pubmed ID
Authors

M Teresa Moral-Pumarega, Sonia Caserío-Carbonero, Javier De-La-Cruz-Bértolo, Pilar Tejada-Palacios, David Lora-Pablos, Carmen R Pallás-Alonso

Abstract

Increasingly, neonatal clinics seek to minimize painful experiences and stress for premature infants. Fundoscopy performed with a binocular indirect ophthalmoscope is the reference examination technique for screening of retinopathy of prematurity (ROP), and it is associated with pain and stress. Wide-field digital retinal imaging is a recent technique that should be evaluated for minimizing infant pain and stress.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 80 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 9 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 10%
Researcher 8 10%
Student > Master 8 10%
Student > Bachelor 5 6%
Other 16 20%
Unknown 26 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 31%
Engineering 5 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Neuroscience 3 4%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Other 12 15%
Unknown 29 36%
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 17 September 2012.
All research outputs
#20,166,700
of 22,678,224 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pediatrics
#2,575
of 2,976 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#152,269
of 170,197 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pediatrics
#45
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,678,224 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 2,976 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. 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 170,197 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 51 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.