↓ Skip to main content

Prospectively assessing risk for premature ovarian senescence in young females: a new paradigm

Overview of attention for article published in Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
78 Mendeley
Title
Prospectively assessing risk for premature ovarian senescence in young females: a new paradigm
Published in
Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12958-015-0026-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Norbert Gleicher, Vitaly A Kushnir, David H Barad

Abstract

Approximately 10% of women suffer from premature ovarian senescence (POS), ca. 9% as occult primary ovarian insufficiency (OPOI, also called premature ovarian aging, POA) and ca. 1% as primary ovarian insufficiency (POI, also called premature ovarian failure, POF). In a large majority of cases POS is currently only diagnosed at advanced clinical stages when women present with clinical infertility. We here, based on published evidence, suggest a new diagnostic paradigm, which is based on identifying young women at increased risk for POS at much earlier stages. Risk factors for POS are known from the literature, and can be used to identify a sub-group of young women at increased risk, who then are followed sequentially with serial assessments of functional ovarian reserve (FOR) until a diagnosis of POS is either reached or refuted. At approximately 25% prevalence in general U.S. populations (and somewhat different prevalence rates in more homogenous Asian and African populations), so-called low (CGGn<26) mutations of the fragile X mental retardation 1 (FMR1) gene, likely, represents the most common known risk factor, including history-based risk factors from medical, genetic and family histories. Women so affirmatively diagnosed with POS at relative young ages, then have the opportunity to reconsider their reproductive planning and/or choose fertility preservation via oocyte or ovarian tissue cryopreservation at ages when such procedures are clinically much more effective and, therefore, also more cost-effective. Appropriate validation studies will have to precede widespread utilization of this paradigm.

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Australia 1 1%
Unknown 76 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 15%
Student > Master 12 15%
Student > Bachelor 12 15%
Researcher 8 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 9%
Other 13 17%
Unknown 14 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 35 45%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 6%
Engineering 2 3%
Other 5 6%
Unknown 16 21%
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 27 April 2015.
All research outputs
#20,269,439
of 22,800,560 outputs
Outputs from Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology
#835
of 973 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#223,837
of 265,109 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology
#17
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,800,560 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 973 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.9. 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 265,109 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 23 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.