↓ Skip to main content

Preimplantation genetic diagnosis: State of the ART 2011

Overview of attention for article published in Human Genetics, July 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

patent
2 patents
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
173 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
216 Mendeley
Title
Preimplantation genetic diagnosis: State of the ART 2011
Published in
Human Genetics, July 2011
DOI 10.1007/s00439-011-1056-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joyce C. Harper, Sioban B. SenGupta

Abstract

For the last 20 years, preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) has been mostly performed on cleavage stage embryos after the biopsy of 1-2 cells and PCR and FISH have been used for the diagnosis. The main indications have been single gene disorders and inherited chromosome abnormalities. Preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) for aneuploidy is a technique that has used PGD technology to examine chromosomes in embryos from couples undergoing IVF with the aim of helping select the chromosomally 'best' embryo for transfer. It has been applied to patients of advanced maternal age, repeated implantation failure, repeated miscarriages and severe male factor infertility. Recent randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have shown that PGS performed on cleavage stage embryos for a variety of indications does not improve delivery rates. At the cleavage stage, the cells biopsied from the embryo are often not representative of the rest of the embryo due to chromosomal mosaicism. There has therefore been a move towards blastocyst and polar body biopsy, depending on the indication and regulations in specific countries (in some countries, biopsy of embryos is not allowed). Blastocyst biopsy has an added advantage as vitrification of blastocysts, even post biopsy, has been shown to be a very successful method of cryopreserving embryos. However, mosaicism is also observed in blastocysts. There have been dramatic changes in the method of diagnosing small numbers of cells for PGD. Both array-comparative genomic hybridisation and single nucleotide polymorphism arrays have been introduced clinically for PGD and PGS. For PGD, the use of SNP arrays brings with it ethical concerns as a large amount of genetic information will be available from each embryo. For PGS, RCTs need to be conducted using both array-CGH and SNP arrays to determine if either will result in an increase in delivery rates.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 216 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 1%
United States 2 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Nigeria 1 <1%
Unknown 208 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 39 18%
Student > Master 36 17%
Researcher 31 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 13%
Student > Postgraduate 14 6%
Other 39 18%
Unknown 30 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 68 31%
Medicine and Dentistry 56 26%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 27 13%
Social Sciences 5 2%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 2%
Other 18 8%
Unknown 38 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 29 January 2024.
All research outputs
#2,919,256
of 22,665,794 outputs
Outputs from Human Genetics
#260
of 2,948 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,795
of 116,726 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Genetics
#5
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,665,794 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,948 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 116,726 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.