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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Comparative neonatal outcomes in singleton births from blastocyst transfers or cleavage-stage embryo transfers: a systematic review and meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12958-017-0255-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xingling Wang, Mingze Du, Yichun Guan, Bijun Wang, Junwei Zhang, Zihua Liu |
| Abstract |
Comparative neonatal outcomes with respect to singleton births from blastocyst transfers or cleavage-state embryo transfers are controversial with respect to which method is superior. Many studies have yielded contradictory results. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis for the purpose of comparing neonatal outcomes in single births following IVF/ICSI. We searched the Medline, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials (CCTR) databases until October 2016. Studies and trials that contained neonatal outcomes for singleton births were included. Data were extracted in 2 × 2 tables. The analysis was performed using Rev Man 5.1 software. Risk ratios (RRs) and risk differences, with 95% confidence intervals, were calculated to assess the results of each outcome. Subgroups were applied in all outcomes. Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS) checklists were used to assess the quality of the referenced studies. Twelve studies met the criteria in this meta-analysis. There was a high risk of preterm birth after blastocyst embryo transfer versus the risk after cleavage-stage transfer (RR: 1.11, 95% CI: 1.01-1.22). For the "only fresh" subgroup, the outcome was coincident (RR: 1.16, 95% CI: 1.06-1.27). For the "fresh and frozen" and "only frozen" subgroups, there were no differences. Patients who received fresh blastocyst embryo transfers had a high risk of very preterm births (RR: 1.16, 95% CI: 1.02-1.31). Finally, cleavage-stage embryo transfers were associated with a high risk of infants who were small for gestational age (0.83, 95% CI: 0.76-0.92) and a low risk of those who were large for gestation age (1.14, 95% CI: 1.04-1.25). The risks of preterm and very preterm births increased after fresh blastocyst transfers versus the risks after fresh cleavage-stage embryo transfers. However, in frozen embryo transfers, there were no differences. Blastocyst embryo transfers resulted in high risks of infants who were large for gestational age, and cleavage-stage embryo transfers resulted in high risks of infants who were small for gestational age. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 70 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 9 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 11% |
| Researcher | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 13 | 19% |
| Unknown | 23 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 33% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 3% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 9% |
| Unknown | 29 | 41% |
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 15 December 2018.
All research outputs
#15,462,982
of 22,977,819 outputs
Outputs from Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology
#540
of 983 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#194,926
of 310,957 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology
#6
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,977,819 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 983 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 310,957 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.