Five year incidence of visual field loss in adult chinese. The beijing eye study
PLoS ONE, ISSN: 1932-6203, Vol: 7, Issue: 5, Page: e37232
2012
- 6Citations
- 26Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations6
- Citation Indexes6
- CrossRef1
- Captures26
- Readers26
- 26
Article Description
Purpose: To describe the cumulative 5 year incidence of visual field loss in adult Chinese in Greater Beijing. Methods: The Beijing Eye Study 2006 included 3251 subjects (mean age 60.4±10.1 years) who had participated in the Beijing Eye Study 2001 and returned for re-examination. All participants underwent a comprehensive eye examination, including visual field test by frequency doubling threshold perimetry. An abnormal visual field was defined as reduced sensitivity in at least one test location. Incident visual field loss was defined as a change in visual field from normal at baseline to abnormal at follow-up. Results: An incident visual field loss was detected in 273 eyes (4.3±0.5%)/235 subjects (7.3±0.5%). It was significantly associated with higher age (P = 0.001), higher intraocular pressure (P<0.001), and higher fasting blood glucose concentration (P = 0.019). Considering only eyes (n = 140) with a detected cause for visual field loss, the most frequent causes were cataract (68 (48.6%) eyes) followed by glaucoma (23 (16.4%) eyes), diabetic retinopathy (13 (9.3%) eyes), age-related macular degeneration (10 (7.1%) eyes), and myopic degenerative retinopathy (9 (6.4%) eyes). For 133 (48.7%) eyes with a visual field loss, the cause for the VFL remained unclear. Conclusions: The 5-year incidence of visual field loss was 4.3±0.5% per eye or 7.3±0.5% per subject. It increased significantly with age, intraocular pressure, and fasting blood glucose level. Major causes for the incidence of visual field loss were cataract, glaucoma and diabetic retinopathy. © 2012 Wang et al.
Bibliographic Details
10.1371/journal.pone.0037232; 10.1371/journal.pone.0037232.t001; 10.1371/journal.pone.0037232.t002; 10.1371/journal.pone.0037232.t004; 10.1371/journal.pone.0037232.t003
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84862083364&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0037232; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22624000; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0037232.t001; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0037232.t001; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0037232; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0037232.t002; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0037232.t002; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0037232.t004; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0037232.t004; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0037232.t003; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0037232.t003; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0037232.t004; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0037232.t004; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0037232.t003; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0037232.t003; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0037232.t001; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0037232.t001; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0037232.t002; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0037232.t002; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0037232; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0037232; http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0037232; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0037232&type=printable; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0037232; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0037232.t001; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0037232.t002; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0037232.t003; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0037232.t004; http://www.plosone.org/article/metrics/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0037232; http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0037232&type=printable; http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0037232
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know