↓ Skip to main content

Selection of single blastocysts for fresh transfer via standard morphology assessment alone and with array CGH for good prognosis IVF patients: results from a randomized pilot study

Overview of attention for article published in Molecular Cytogenetics, May 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#3 of 399)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
4 X users
patent
1 patent
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
1 Google+ user
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
499 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
295 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.
Title
Selection of single blastocysts for fresh transfer via standard morphology assessment alone and with array CGH for good prognosis IVF patients: results from a randomized pilot study
Published in
Molecular Cytogenetics, May 2012
DOI 10.1186/1755-8166-5-24
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zhihong Yang, Jiaen Liu, Gary S Collins, Shala A Salem, Xiaohong Liu, Sarah S Lyle, Alison C Peck, E Scott Sills, Rifaat D Salem

Abstract

Single embryo transfer (SET) remains underutilized as a strategy to reduce multiple gestation risk in IVF, and its overall lower pregnancy rate underscores the need for improved techniques to select one embryo for fresh transfer. This study explored use of comprehensive chromosomal screening by array CGH (aCGH) to provide this advantage and improve pregnancy rate from SET.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 295 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Singapore 1 <1%
Slovenia 1 <1%
Russia 1 <1%
Poland 1 <1%
Unknown 289 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 46 16%
Student > Master 42 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 32 11%
Student > Bachelor 29 10%
Other 27 9%
Other 62 21%
Unknown 57 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 85 29%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 62 21%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 53 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 2%
Engineering 5 2%
Other 19 6%
Unknown 66 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 39. 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 12 July 2014.
All research outputs
#880,008
of 22,664,644 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Cytogenetics
#3
of 399 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,789
of 163,461 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Cytogenetics
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,664,644 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 399 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 163,461 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them