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 |
Fertility preservation training for obstetrics and gynecology fellows: a highly desired but non-standardized experience
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Fertility Research and Practice, July 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40738-017-0036-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Elizabeth J. N. Miller, Lisa M. Cookingham, Teresa K. Woodruff, Ginny L. Ryan, Karen M. Summers, Laxmi A. Kondapalli, Divya K. Shah |
| Abstract |
Despite a large body of data suggesting that delivery of fertility care to cancer patients is inconsistent and frequently insufficient, there is a paucity of literature examining training in fertility preservation for those physicians expected to discuss options or execute therapy. The study objective was to compare fertility preservation training between Reproductive Endocrinology & Infertility (REI) and Gynecologic Oncology (GYN ONC) fellows and assess the need for additional education in this field. A 38-item survey was administered to REI and GYN ONC fellows in the United states in April 2014. Survey items included: 1) Clinical exposure, perceived quality of training, and self-reported knowledge in fertility preservation; 2) an educational needs assessment of desire for additional training in fertility preservation. Seventy-nine responses were received from 137 REI and 160 GYN ONC fellows (response rate 27%). REI fellows reported seeing significantly more fertility preservation patients and rated their training more favorably than GYN ONC fellows (48% of REI fellows versus 7% of GYN ONC fellows rated training as 'excellent', p < 0.001). A majority of all fellows felt discussing fertility preservation was 'very important' but fellows differed in self-reported ability to counsel patients, with 43% of REI fellows and only 4% of GYN ONC fellows able to counsel patients 'all the time' (p = 0.002). Seventy-six percent of all fellows felt more education in fertility preservation was required, and 91% felt it should be a required component of fellowship training. Significant variability exists in fertility preservation training for REI and GYN ONC fellows, with the greatest gap seen for GYN ONC fellows, both in perceived quality of fertility preservation training and number of fertility preservation patients seen. A majority of fellows in both disciplines support the idea of a standardized multi-disciplinary curriculum in fertility preservation. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 50% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 29 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 4 | 14% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 10% |
| Researcher | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 9 | 31% |
| Unknown | 5 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 24% |
| Unspecified | 4 | 14% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 7% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 21% |
| Unknown | 7 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 11 October 2017.
All research outputs
#7,537,059
of 22,996,001 outputs
Outputs from Fertility Research and Practice
#18
of 48 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#119,704
of 313,598 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Fertility Research and Practice
#2
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,996,001 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 48 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.6. This one scored the same or higher as 30 of them.
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 313,598 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 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.