↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Spectacle correction versus no spectacles for prevention of strabismus in hyperopic children

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
15 tweeters
facebook
4 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
95 Mendeley
Title
Spectacle correction versus no spectacles for prevention of strabismus in hyperopic children
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd007738.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lisa Jones-Jordan, Xue Wang, Roberta W Scherer, Donald O Mutti

Abstract

Hyperopia (far-sightedness) in infancy requires accommodative effort to bring images into focus. Prolonged accommodative effort has been associated with an increased risk of strabismus (eye misalignment). Strabismus makes it difficult for the eyes to work together and may result in symptoms of asthenopia (eye strain) and intermittent diplopia (double vision), and makes near work tasks difficult to complete. Untreated strabismus may result in the development of amblyopia (lazy eye). The prescription of spectacles to correct hyperopic refractive error is believed to prevent the development of strabismus.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 95 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 21%
Researcher 14 15%
Student > Bachelor 13 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 9%
Student > Postgraduate 6 6%
Other 17 18%
Unknown 16 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 40 42%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 13%
Social Sciences 5 5%
Psychology 4 4%
Engineering 3 3%
Other 12 13%
Unknown 19 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 October 2017.
All research outputs
#1,524,320
of 16,255,656 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,921
of 11,454 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,713
of 202,676 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#77
of 214 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,255,656 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,454 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 24.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 202,676 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 214 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.