↓ Skip to main content

Nutritional supplementation and artificial reproductive technique (ART) outcomes

Overview of attention for article published in Reproduction, Fertility, & Development, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (63rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
patent
1 patent
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
42 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.
Article details
Title
Nutritional supplementation and artificial reproductive technique (ART) outcomes
Published in
Reproduction, Fertility, & Development, April 2015
DOI 10.1071/rd14304
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Approximately one in six couples suffer from subfertility, and many seek treatment with artificial reproductive technologies (ART). Despite improvements in laboratory techniques and ovarian stimulation, ongoing pregnancy rates per cycle remain at ~25%. Couples wanting to improve their chances may turn to adjuvant therapies, such as nutritional supplements. There is growing evidence that periconceptional nutritional status is a key determinant of fertility and long-term health of the offspring, and a lucrative market has developed to meet the demand based on these benefits. However, the practice of routine dietary supplementation before and during IVF treatment has not been subject to well-powered prospective randomised trials. In this article, the potential roles of specific nutritional supplements in the context of improving IVF outcomes are reviewed and an assessment is made of the evidence base supporting their clinical use in this context. Finally, current research needs in the field are outlined.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
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 demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 42 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 12%
Other 4 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 10%
Student > Master 3 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Other 10 24%
Unknown 14 33%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Psychology 2 5%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 14 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 26 August 2021.
All research outputs
#11,533,864
of 34,518,147 outputs
Outputs from Reproduction, Fertility, & Development
#331
of 1,444 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#108,652
of 308,802 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Reproduction, Fertility, & Development
#11
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,518,147 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 65th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,444 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 308,802 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.