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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
| Title |
Clinical Outcomes of SMILE and FS-LASIK Used to Treat Myopia: A Meta-analysis.
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Refractive Surgery, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3928/1081597x-20151111-06 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yingjie Zhang, Qin Shen, Yan Jia, Dan Zhou, Jibo Zhou |
| Abstract |
To assess possible differences in clinical outcomes when small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and femtosecond laser-assisted LASIK (FS-LASIK) are used to correct myopia. A systematic review and meta-analysis. A systematic literature search was performed using Cochrane Collaboration methodology to identify randomized controlled trials and appropriate comparative studies comparing SMILE and FS-LASIK for myopia. The authors identified 11 studies from a review of 102 articles, involving a total of 1,101 eyes, of which 532 eyes (48.32%) underwent SMILE and 569 eyes (51.68%) underwent FS-LASIK. No significant difference between the two procedures was evident in terms of final refractive spherical equivalent (P = .72), the proportion of eyes losing one or more lines of corrected distance visual acuity after surgery (P = .69), or the proportion of eyes achieving an uncorrected distance visual acuity of 20/20 or better (P = .35) and a refractive spherical equivalent within ±1.00 diopter of the target values (P = .70). The tear break-up time was longer in the SMILE group than the FS-LASIK group at 1 (P = .004) and 6 (P = .02) months after surgery. Corneal sensitivity was higher in the SMILE group than in the FS-LASIK group at 1 week (P < .00001) and 1 (P < .0001), 3 (P < .00001), and 6 (P < .003) months after surgery. SMILE and FS-LASIK were comparable in terms of both safety and efficacy. SMILE may create fewer dry eye symptoms than FS-LASIK. Corneal sensitivity was greater after SMILE than FS-LASIK. [J Refract Surg. 2016;32(4):256-265.]. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Egypt | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 65 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 11 | 17% |
| Other | 8 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 13 | 20% |
| Unknown | 18 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 35 | 53% |
| Engineering | 4 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 2% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 23 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. 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 30 January 2022.
All research outputs
#1,594,603
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Refractive Surgery
#8
of 1,173 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,537
of 314,725 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Refractive Surgery
#1
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,173 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 314,725 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.