Skip to main content

Some NLM-NCBI services and products are experiencing heavy traffic, which may affect performance and availability. We apologize for the inconvenience and appreciate your patience. For assistance, please contact our Help Desk at info@ncbi.nlm.nih.gov.

Cureus logoLink to Cureus
. 2022 Oct 4;14(10):e29930. doi: 10.7759/cureus.29930

An Analysis of the 50 Most-Cited "Uveitis" Articles Published Between 2010-2020 From a Bibliographic and Altmetric Perspective

Hidayet Sener 1,, Cem Evereklioglu 1, Fatih Horozoglu 1
Editors: Alexander Muacevic, John R Adler
PMCID: PMC9634141  PMID: 36348932

Abstract

Purpose

We aimed to evaluate the 50 most-cited articles on uveitis according to their Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) and additional metrics.

Methods

The Web of Science (WoS) core collection database was used in this study. The article and journal metrics and characteristics were examined. In addition, the effect of article and journal metrics on the AAS was examined with multivariate adaptive regression splines (MARS).

Results

The number of citations of the evaluated articles ranged from 670 to 90, and AASs ranged from 633 to 0. According to the MARS model, the importance scores of the predictors were as follows: article influence score (100%), immediacy index (77.74%), number of years since publication (57.79%), times cited in WoS (32.69%). We found that the trend of articles on uveitis was related to the "treatment category", namely, adalimumab. Second, the popular topic was uveitis caused by viruses.

Conclusions

We found that citation-based metrics and year of publication contributed to AAS. AAS appears to be inadequate in assessing the quality of articles. However, due to the electronic transformation of the publishing industry, it seems inevitable that altmetrics will become an additional supportive metric.

Keywords: immediacy index, eigenfactor, impact, altmetric, ocular inflammation, uveitis

Introduction

Uveitis refers to inflammation of the uveal tract, which can cause loss of vision [1]. The incidence of uveitis peaks at working ages [2]. Blindness caused by uveitis is treatable or potentially preventable. Not all types of uveitis have the same effect on vision, and uveitis should be classified and treated according to the underlying etiology. Systemic immunomodulatory agents and conventional immunosuppressive agents are available for the treatment of non-infectious uveitis (NIU). In recent years, the introduction of biological agents has led to important developments in the treatment of uveitis. Biological agents are promising drugs designed to be effective based on the molecular understanding of disease pathogenesis [3]. Infectious uveitis (IU) is one of the most common and visually devastating causes of uveitis worldwide [4]. IUs can mimic NIUs and their early diagnosis and treatment are important.

The main purpose of authors is to convey scientific information to a wide audience. The impact of the articles is evaluated by various metric measurements. The most important of these is the number of times cited. Another important point is the metrics of the journal publishing the article. The most well-known of these is the impact factor (IF), which is calculated by examining the citations of the articles in scientific journals and showing the impact of the journals in their fields [5].

Citations are of course important in calculating journal metrics. However, nowadays, due to the development of the internet and social media, scientific articles are not only cited from scientific journals but also from many sources. Considering that it would be incomplete to evaluate the popularity of a scientific publication by the number of scientific citations alone, altmetrics were created that include citations in channels such as social media, Twitter, blog posts, and news sites. Altmetrics compile the impact of the article on the internet and social media from dozens of different sources and scores its popularity. Altmetrics also measure where and by whom the article is cited, such as language, country, and region [6].

In this study, we aimed to evaluate the 50 most-cited articles on uveitis according to their Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) and additional metrics. The journals in which the articles were published, categories of the journals, the types of articles, and the topic of the article were examined. In addition, we aimed to show the effect of article and journal metrics on the AAS.

Materials and methods

The Web of Science (WoS) core collection database (www.webofknowledge.com) was used in this study. In the advanced search section, the term "Uveitis" was searched in the title, abstract, and keywords. The 50 most-cited articles were included in the study (Access date: February 17, 2022). The time filter was applied between January 01, 2010, and December 31, 2020. No other filters were applied. All data obtained were collected on the date of access. The list of articles obtained is presented in the appendices. Non-relevant articles and animal studies were excluded. Relevant metrics of all articles were obtained. We focused on articles whose primary priority was uveitis.

Titles, first authors, all authors, year of publication, number of years since publication (NYsP), number of citations, Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) and average citations per year (ACpY), journal IF, journal 5-year IF, Q category, journal citation indicator (JCI), Eigenfactor score (EF), article influence score (AIS), immediacy index (II) and h-index were recorded and examined.

The AASs of the articles were obtained from the bookmark "Altmetric it!" (www.altmetric.com). The h-index of journals was obtained from scientific journal rankings (www.scimagojr.com). All other metrics were obtained from the WoS and journal citation report 2020 (www.jcr.clarivate.com). All statistical analyses were performed using Minitab 17 Statistical Software (Minitab, Inc., State College, PA) and Salford Predictive Modeller software v. 8 (Minitab, Inc.). Kolmogorov-Smirnov normality test was performed with the data set. The data were non-normally distributed and medians (25-75% quartiles) were used. Metric data were evaluated with Spearman’s rho correlation analysis. In evaluating the relationship between the AAS and additional metrics, multivariate adaptive regression splines (MARS), which can establish both a linear and non-linear model, were used while creating the regression model. The eight predictors included in the model were: times cited in WoS, 5-year IF, normalized EF, AIS, II, NYsP, and h-index.

Results

The number of citations of the evaluated articles ranged from 670 to 90, and AASs ranged from 633 to 0. Detailed metrics and characteristics of the first 50 uveitis articles are summarized in Table 1. The top 50 articles were cited 7897 times. The relationship between the year of publication of the articles and the annual cumulative citation is presented in Figure 1. The scatter plot of AAS by years is presented in Figure 2.

Table 1. Metrics and characteristics of the 50 most-cited articles.

Median (25%-75% interquartile range), Mean±Standard deviation, NA: not applicable, ACpY: average citation per year, NYsP: number of years since publication, WoS: Web of Science

  N Times cited of WoS Altmetric Attention Score Publication year NYsP ACpY of WoS
All articles 50 123 (103.0-166.75) 3 (1.0-9.25) 2012 (2011.0-2015.0) 10 (7.0-11.0) 13.9 (10.7-18.2)
  Non-infectious uveitis (NIU) 38 121.5 (102.0-173.25) 3 (1.0-6.5) 2012 (2010.0-2014.25) 10 (7.75-12.0) 13.6 (10.4-18.8)
  Infectious uveitis (IU) 5 113 (97.5-208.5) 1 (0.5-427.0) 2015 (2013.0-2015.5) 7 (6.5-9) 17.1 (11.6-29.7)
  NIU + IU 7 136 (111.0-156.0) 7 (3.0-20.0) 2013 (2012.0-2014.0) 9 (8.0-10.0) 13.8 (12.2-17.3)
Study type            
  Systematic reviews and meta-analysis 1 140 84 2013 9 15.5
  Reviews 9 113 (105.0-169.5) 1 (0.0-5.5) 2014 (2011.0-2016.0) 8 (6.0-11.0) 16.3 (12.3-22.6)
  Original research 39 122 (103.0-166.0) 3 (1.0-14.0) 2012 (2011.0-2014.0) 10 (8.0-11.0) 13.5 (10.4-17.1)
   Cohort study 13 109 (95.0-146.0) 1 (1.0-5.0) 2012 (2010.0-2013.0) 10 (9.0-12.0) 12.2 (10.0-14.4)
   Randomized controlled trial 9 202 (143.0-349.0) 24 (5.0-116.5) 2013 (2010.5-2016.0) 9 (6.0-11.5) 34.2 (15.1-43.0)
   Case report 3 103 (NA) 221 (NA) 2015 (NA) 7 (NA) 17.1 (NA)
   Case series 10 118 (107.0-140.0) 1 (0.75-3.0) 2012 (2010.0-2012.25) 10 (9.75-12.0) 11.3 (9.6-14.9)
   Cross-sectional study 4 120.5 (102.0-150.25) 0.5 (0.0-10.0) 2011.5 (2011.0-2013.5) 10.5 (8.5-11.0) 13.4 (10.0-14.1)
   Conference paper 1 267 8 2014 8 33.3
Study topic            
  Full review 4 112.5 (107.5-163.25) 1 (0.25-5.5) 2013.5 (2011.5-2016.25) 8.5 (5.75-10.25) 15.2 (11.5-20.8)
  Epidemiology 7 136 (99.0-156.0) 7 (1.0-25.0) 2013 (2012.0-2016.0) 9 (6.0-10.0) 15 (12.2-17.3)
  Pathogenesis 5 99 (97.0-193.5) 3 (0.0-6.0) 2011 (2010.5-2013.5) 11 (8.5-11.5) 10.2 (9.3-18.4)
  Diagnosis - prognosis 2 124.5 (NA) 6.5 (NA) 2014.5 (NA) 7.5 (NA) 16.7 (NA)
  Treatment 24 141 (111.25-197.75) 3 (1.0-12.5) 2011.5 (2010.0-2013.75) 10.5 (8.25-12.0) 13.6 (10.8-30.6)
  Advanced imaging 5 94 (92.0-143.5) 1 (0.5-1.0) 2012 (2011.5-2014.5) 10 (7.5-10.5) 13 (9.8-14.8)
  Clinic presentation 3 103 (NA) 221 (NA) 2015 (NA) 7 (NA) 17.1 (NA)

Figure 1. Cumulative display of citations by year and publication years of the articles included in the study.

Figure 1

Figure 2. Linear regression graph showing the relationship between publication year and Altmetric Attention Score of the articles included in the study.

Figure 2

The journal with the most articles in the top 50 was "Ophthalmology", with 10 articles. The list of journals in which the top 50 uveitis articles were published and their detailed metrics are presented in Table 5 in the appendices. Journals in the ophthalmology category were the most published category with 29 articles and the median citation of WoS and median AAS were 126 (104.5-161.25) and 2 (0.25-7.75), respectively. Journals in the general medicine category had the highest median citations of 255.5 (154.0-279.25) and an AAS median of 209 (29.0-393.0). Elsevier was the publisher with the most articles, with 19 articles. The metrics by category of the journals in which the first 50 uveitis articles were published are summarized in Table 2.

Table 2. Journal metrics and changes by Q category of WoS and metrics by journal category.

Median (25%-75% interquartile range), NA: not applicable

Journal Category N Times cited of WoS Altmetric Attention Score Journal citation indicator Impact factor h-index Normalized Eigenfactor score Immediacy index Article influence score
All Journals 50 123 (103.0-166.75) 3 (1.0-9.25) 2.64 (1.11-4.01) 7.389 (4.256-12.079) 196 (120.0-244.0) 5.327 (2.585-8.817) 4.126 (1.577-5.798) 2.781 (1.297-3.478)
Q1 category 36 130 (103.0-183.75) 4.5 (1.0-18.5) 3.91 (2.04-4.01) 12.079 (7.389-17.671) 242 (186.0-244.0) 8.769 (4.493-10.112) 5.798 (3.942-6.825) 3.478 (2.263-5.935)
Q2 category 9 112 (100.0-137.0) 1 (0.0-2.0) 1.02 (0.74-1.18) 4.123 (3.093-4.730) 110 (56.0-170.0) 2.826 (0.945-4.362) 1.434 (0.825-1.867) 1.042 (0.678-1.432)
Q3 category 4 117.5 (102.5-135.5) 3 (0.75-63.75) 0.79 (0.53-0.84) 2.602 (2.484-3.628) 75 (53.75-116.5) 0.692 (0.461-1.601) 0.638 (0.609-5.776) 0.696 (0.588-1.010)
Q4 category 1 139 3 0.60 2.454 41 1.531 0.609 0.682
Rheumatology 8 111 (98.0-136.75) 2 (1.0-5.25) 1.40 (1.12-2.70) 6.368 (4.698-10.485) 175.5 (153.25-295.5) 5.431 (3.639-8.961) 2.690 (1.202-4.487) 1.881 (1.388-3.370)
General medicine 6 255.5 (154.0-279.25) 209 (29.0-393.0) 26.14 (15.98-26.14) 91.253 (63.194-91.253) 1030 (693.5-1030.0) 132.478 (75.947-132.478) 162.030 (123.589-186.286) 37.313 (23.311-37.313)
Immunology 4 105.5 (98.25-121.0) 0.5 (0.0-3.25) 1.15 (0.63-1.65) 5.783 (4.095-14.288) 118.5 (69.5-200.5) 2.220 (1.353-4.510) 6.310 (2.359-12.706) 1.532 (1.054-5.491)
Ophthalmology 28 126 (104.5-161.25) 2 (0.25-7.75) 2.64 (1.60-4.01) 7.389 (4.256-12.079) 196 (120.0-244.0) 4.493 (2.585-8.769) 3.942 (1.582-5.798) 2.781 (1.297-3.478)
Genetics and hereditary 1 136 7 0.92 4.123 110 2.826 0.771 1.327
Cell biology 1 670 34 4.05 17.999 216 21.770 4.311 8.503
Biochemistry and molecular biology 1 113 3 0.45 2.607 94 0.617 0.646 0.764
Multidisciplinary sciences 1 92 1 0.57 3.240 332 226.378 0.619 1.011

AAS was moderately correlated with IF, EF, AIS, JCI, and ACpY. AAS was weakly correlated with the number of citations and II. The correlation between AAS and article and journal metrics is summarized in Table 3. In the MARS model, the predictors are listed according to their importance scores calculated on the 100% scale, and the most important variable always receives a 100% score. Accordingly, the importance scores of the predictors are as follows: AIS (100%), II (77.74%), NYsP (57.79%), times cited in WoS (32.69%). In the model constructed with predictors, R2 was 0.97. The contribution of the interaction of the predictors to the model is presented in Figure 3.

Table 3. Correlation between AAS and article and journal metrics.

AAS: Altmetric Attention Score, WoS: Web of Science

*significance level is p <0.05

 

Metrics Spearman rho p value
AAS – Times cited in WoS 0.326 0.021*
AAS – Publication year 0.285 0.045*
AAS – Average citations per year 0.487 <0.001*
AAS – Number of years since publication -0.285 0.045*
AAS – Impact factor 0.476 <0.001*
AAS – 5-year impact factor 0.488 <0.001*
AAS – h-index 0.499 <0.001*
AAS – Journal citation indicator 0.436 0.002*
AAS – Normalized Eigenfactor score 0.466 0.001*
AAS – Article influence score 0.518 <0.001*
AAS – Immediacy index 0.346 0.014*

Figure 3. Three-dimensional representation of the contribution of the interaction of the predictors ((A) II and NYsP, (B) II and times cited in WoS) to the AAS in the MARS model.

Figure 3

II: Immediacy index; NYsP: number of years since publication; WoS: Web of Science; AAS: Altmetric Attention Score; MARS: multivariate adaptive regression splines

Discussion

In this study, in which we evaluated articles related to uveitis, we found that the AAS was associated with citations, citation-based metrics, and the number of years since publication. The fact that AIS were the most important predictors indicates the importance of publishing an article in top journals. The fact that the II is the second-most important predictor reveals that the articles in the journals, which attract the attention of the scientific world faster, are more circulated in the online spaces. This was demonstrated by the fact that NYsP was the third-most important predictor in the regression model. However, caution should be exercised when interpreting these results. There was a time filter in the search strategy in this study. The NYsP might have been a more important predictor without the time filter since the provision of altmetric data began in 2011 [7]. Another thing to be aware of is the existence of social media accounts where journals share articles with their followers. In this way, they aim to make it possible for an article to reach a wider audience and attract attention [6, 8]. Finally, there may be predictors (e.g. popular topics) not included in the regression model.

The topic of most public interest may differ from that of the scientific community, and a more-cited article may not receive enough public attention [9]. Eight articles did not have high AAS in the altmetric analysis of glaucoma [10]. The fact that eight articles in the present study did not have high AAS is concrete proof that the agenda of the public and the scientific community is different. On the other hand, in the present study, it was observed that two case reports of uveitis caused by Zika virus and Ebola virus had a high AAS. The fact that case reports with a low level of scientific evidence compared to others have such a high AAS can be considered a result of the popularity of a disease affecting the public. In the study in which retinal articles in ophthalmology journals were evaluated, it was found that an article on retinal complications of Zika virus had the highest AAS [11]. In a study in which an altmetric analysis of 100 articles related to COVID-19 was performed, it was reported that the AAS was 3246 ± 3795 (85-16548) [12]. In a study evaluating the altmetric activity of 12.3 million WoS publications, it was reported that infectious diseases with a social impact received more attention [13]. AAS can also be interpreted as a social IF [14], and when this information is evaluated, we can say that topics that create social impact get more public attention than topics that are more technical. We can deduce that AAS may be low for a specific topic that concerns healthcare professionals. However, it should be kept in mind that as the popularity of the topic decreases, the speed of altmetric activity may slow down.

When the 10-year pool of articles included in the study is evaluated, it is seen that the majority of the articles are composed of NIUs, and treatment topics are predominant. In the past decade, the introduction of biological agents in the treatment of NIU has revolutionized the treatment. We noticed a concentration of treatment-related articles on adalimumab. Patients with uveitis are a relatively younger population, and uveitis has a more widespread effect on ocular morbidity than age-related macular degeneration [15]. Adalimumab is presented as a promising new treatment option with improvements in visual functionality outcomes [1, 16]. The article with the second-highest AAS (313) in the present study is associated with adalimumab. It may be due to patients wanting to know and understand their treatment, as well as wanting to explore new treatment options. On the other hand, journals in the general medicine category had the highest AAS. The fact that these non-ophthalmology journals are on our list and have a high AAS is proof that they are effective in both the ophthalmology community and the public.

The first limitation of our study was that we did not use a large data sample in the analysis. The second limitation was that we used a time filter. The third limitation was we used single-search terms. Despite these limitations, we have demonstrated the importance level of the effect of additional metrics on ASS.

Conclusions

In conclusion, first, we found that the trend of articles on uveitis was related to the "treatment category"-adalimumab. Second, we found that the most popular topic was uveitis caused by viruses. Finally, we found that citation-based metrics and year of publication contributed to AAS. AAS appears to be inadequate in assessing the quality of articles. However, due to the electronic transformation of the publishing industry, it seems inevitable that altmetrics will become an additional supportive metric.

Appendices

Tables 4-5 show the list of articles and journals included in this paper, respectively.

Table 4. Articles included in study.

  Title First Author Years Times cited AAS
1 Effects of AIN457, a fully human antibody to interleukin-17a, on psoriasis, rheumatoid arthritis, and uveitis Hueber, W 2010 670 34
2 Dexamethasone intravitreal implant for noninfectious intermediate or posterior uveitis Lowder, C 2011 418 5
3 Adalimumab in patients with active noninfectious uveitis Jaffe, GJ 2016 280 313
4 Persistence of Ebola virus in ocular fluid during convalescence Varkey, JB 2015 279 633
5 A look at autoimmunity and inflammation in the eye Caspi, RR 2010 274 8
6 Expert panel recommendations for the use of anti-tumor necrosis factor biologic agents in patients with ocular inflammatory disorders Levy-Clarke, G 2014 267 8
7 Adalimumab for prevention of uveitic flare in patients with inactive non-infectious uveitis controlled by corticosteroids (VISUAL II): a multicentre, double-masked, randomised, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial Nguyen, QD 2016 237 36
8 Secukinumab in the treatment of noninfectious uveitis: results of three randomized, controlled clinical trials Dick, AD 2013 202 14
9 Randomized comparison of systemic anti-inflammatory therapy versus fluocinolone acetonide implant for intermediate, posterior, and panuveitis: the multicenter uveitis steroid treatment trial Kempen, JH 2011 185 24
10 Understanding uveitis: the impact of research on visual outcomes de Smet, MD 2011 180 0
11 Adalimumab plus methotrexate for uveitis in juvenile idiopathic arthritis Ramanan, AV 2017 171 197
12 Interleukin-1 beta-regulating antibody XOMA 052 (gevokizumab) in the treatment of acute exacerbations of resistant uveitis of Behcet's disease: an open-label pilot study Gul, A 2012 169 6
13 Cyclosporine for ocular inflammatory diseases Kacmaz, RO 2010 166 3
14 Mycophenolate mofetil for ocular inflammation Daniel, E 2010 162 0
15 A focus on the epidemiology of uveitis Tsirouki, T 2018 159 0
16 Choroıdal evaluatıon using enhanced depth imagıng spectral-domain optical coherence tomography in Vogt-Koyanagi-Harada disease Fong, AHC 2011 157 1
17 Incidence and prevalence of uveitis results from the pacific ocular inflammation study Acharya, NR 2013 156 20
18 Treatment of refractory uveitis with adalimumab: a prospective multicenter study of 131 patients Diaz-Llopis, M 2012 143 3
19 Review on the worldwide epidemiology of uveitis Miserocchi, E 2013 140 84
20 Rituximab in intractable ocular lesions of behcet's disease; randomized single-blind control study (pilot study) Davatchi, F 2010 139 3
21 Classification of intraocular tuberculosis Gupta, A 2015 138 0
22 Uveitis- a rare disease often associated with systemic diseases and infections- a systematic review of 2619 patients Barisani-Asenbauer, T 2012 136 7
23 Enhanced depth imagıng optıcal coherence tomography of the choroıd ın Vogt-Koyanagi-Harada disease Nakayama, M 2012 130 0
24 Long-term remission after cessation of interferon-alpha treatment in patients with severe uveitis due to Behcet's disease Deuter, CME 2010 130 1
25 Ocular signs predictive of tubercular uveitis Gupta, A 2010 124 1
26 The 2009 prospective multi-center epidemiologic survey of uveitis in Japan Ohguro, N 2012 122 3
27 Multicenter study of infliximab for refractory uveoretinitis in Behcet disease Okada, AA 2012 119 1
28 The multicenter uveitis steroid treatment trial: rationale, design, and baseline characteristics Kempen, JH 2010 115 3
29 Ocular toxoplasmosis past, present and new aspects of an old disease Maenz, M 2014 113 1
30 Cytokines in autoimmune uveitis Horai, R 2011 113 3
31 Prevention of flare recurrences in childhood-refractory chronic uveitis: an open-label comparative study of adalimumab versus infliximab Simonini, G 2011 112 0
32 Abatacept for severe anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha refractory juvenile idiopathic arthritis-related uveitis Zulian, F 2010 112 1
33 Long-term clinical outcome and causes of vision loss in patients with uveitis Tomkins-Netzer, O 2014 111 13
34 Adalimumab successful in sarcoidosis patients with refractory chronic non-infectious uveitis Erckens, RJ 2012 111 0
35 Cyclophosphamide for ocular inflammatory diseases Pujari, SS 2010 109 0
36 Treatment of severe uveitis associated with juvenile idiopathic arthritis with anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody (rituximab) Heiligenhaus, A 2011 108 1
37 Safety and efficacy of infliximab and adalimumab for refractory uveitis in juvenile idiopathic arthritis: 1-year followup data from the Italian registry Zannin, ME 2013 104 3
38 Uveitis associated with Zika virus infection Furtado, JM 2016 103 221
39 Risk of cataract development among children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis-related uveitis treated with topical corticosteroids Thorne, JE 2010 103 1
40 Risk factors for loss of visual acuity among patients with uveitis associated with juvenile idiopathic arthritis: the systemic ımmunosuppressive therapy for eye diseases study Gregory, AC 2013 99 1
41 Cytokine profiles in aqueous humor of patients with different clinical entities of endogenous uveitis Abu El-Asrar, AM 2011 99 0
42 Immune mechanisms in inflammatory and degenerative eye disease Perez, VL 2015 98 4
43 Serpiginous choroiditis and infectious multifocal serpiginoid choroiditis Khanamiri, HN 2013 96 7
44 Inhibition of th17 differentiation by anti-tnf-alpha therapy in uveitis patients with Behcet's disease Sugita, S 2012 96 1
45 Efficacy and safety of intravenous secukinumab in noninfectious uveitis requiring steroid-sparing ımmunosuppressive therapy Letko, E 2015 94 5
46 Choroidal thickness in Behcet's uveitis: an enhanced depth imaging-optical coherence tomography and its association with angiographic changes Kim, M 2013 94 1
47 Clinical and transcriptional response to the long-acting ınterleukin-1 blocker canakinumab in blau syndrome-related uveitis Simonini, G 2013 94 6
48 Choroidal vascularity index (cvi) - a novel optical coherence tomography parameter for monitoring patients with panuveitis? Agrawal, R 2016 92 1
49 Acute syphılıtıc posterior placoid chorioretinitis report of a case series and comprehensive review of the literature Eandi, CM 2012 92 1
50 Prevalence of noninfectious uveitis in the United States a claims-based analysis Thorne, JE 2016 90 25

Table 5. Journals evaluated in the study.

Journal Name Number of Articles Impact Factor H Index Q Category
Ophthalmology 10 12.079 244 1
New England Journal of Medicine 4 91.253 1.030 1
Jama Ophthalmology (Archives of Ophthalmology) 4 7.389 196 1
American Journal of Ophthalmology 3 5.258 186 1
Retina-The Journal of Retinal and Vitreous Diseases 3 4.256 120 1
Progress in Retinal and Eye Research 2 21.198 152 1
Arthritis and Rheumatism 2 10.995 314 1
Arthritis Care & Research 2 4.794 163 2
Ocular Immunology and Inflammation 2 3.070 56 2
Lancet 1 79.323 762 1
Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 1 19.103 240 1
Science Translational Medicine 1 17.992 216 1
Trends in Immunology 1 16.678 226 1
Journal of Clinical Investigation 1 14.808 488 1
Rheumatology 1 7.580 173 1
Survey of Ophthalmology 1 6.048 132 1
Arthritis Research & Therapy 1 5.156 150 2
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science 1 4.799 218 1
Journal of Rheumatology 1 4.666 178 2
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases 1 4.123 110 2
Clinical Immunology 1 3.969 124 3
PLOS One 1 3.240 332 2
Graefes Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology 1 3.117 101 2
Journal of Interferon and Cytokine Research 1 2.607 94 3
European Journal of Ophthalmology 1 2.597 53 3
International Journal of Rheumatic Diseases 1 2.454 41 4
Japanese Journal of Ophthalmology 1 2.447 56 3

The content published in Cureus is the result of clinical experience and/or research by independent individuals or organizations. Cureus is not responsible for the scientific accuracy or reliability of data or conclusions published herein. All content published within Cureus is intended only for educational, research and reference purposes. Additionally, articles published within Cureus should not be deemed a suitable substitute for the advice of a qualified health care professional. Do not disregard or avoid professional medical advice due to content published within Cureus.

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Human Ethics

Consent was obtained or waived by all participants in this study

Animal Ethics

Animal subjects: All authors have confirmed that this study did not involve animal subjects or tissue.

References


Articles from Cureus are provided here courtesy of Cureus Inc.

RESOURCES