↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of Visual Evoked Potentials and Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Thickness in Alzheimer’s Disease

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurology, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 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
Comparison of Visual Evoked Potentials and Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Thickness in Alzheimer’s Disease
Published in
Frontiers in Neurology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fneur.2013.00203
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robert Kromer, Nermin Serbecic, Lucrezia Hausner, Lutz Froelich, Sven C. Beutelspacher

Abstract

Introduction: Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a long term progressive neurodegenerative disease and might affect the retinal nerve fiber layer thickness (RNFLT) of the eye. There is increasing evidence that visual evoked potentials (VEP), which are an objective way to indicate visual field loss, might be affected by the disease as well. Materials and Methods: About 22 patients (mean age: 75.9 ± 6.1 years; 14 women) with mild-to-moderate AD and 22 sex-matched healthy patients were examined. We compared the use of VEP and RNFLT using the latest high-resolution spectral domain optical coherence tomography with eye-tracking capabilities for optimized peripapillary scan centering for the first time in AD patients. Results: The mean MMSE score was 22.59 ± 5.47 in the AD group, and did not significantly correlate with the VEP latencies. We found no significant difference between the VEP latencies of the AD patients and those of the control patients. No peripapillary sector of the retina had a RNFLT significantly correlated with the VEP latencies. Discussion: We demonstrated that pattern VEP did not show any significant correlation despite subtle loss in RNFLT. It remains open whether additional flash VEP combined with RNFLT analysis may be useful in diagnosing AD, particularly for mild-to-moderate stages of the disease.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

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.
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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Poland 1 2%
Unknown 50 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 25%
Professor > Associate Professor 7 14%
Student > Bachelor 7 14%
Other 4 8%
Student > Master 4 8%
Other 11 22%
Unknown 5 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 37%
Neuroscience 6 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 10%
Psychology 4 8%
Computer Science 2 4%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 10 20%
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 16 December 2013.
All research outputs
#20,213,623
of 22,736,112 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#8,644
of 11,645 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#248,822
of 280,808 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#117
of 210 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,736,112 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 11,645 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. 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 280,808 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 210 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.