↓ Skip to main content

Time to Pregnancy: A Computational Method for Using the Duration of Non-Conception for Predicting Conception

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, October 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
19 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
reddit
1 Redditor
q&a
1 Q&A thread

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
75 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
Time to Pregnancy: A Computational Method for Using the Duration of Non-Conception for Predicting Conception
Published in
PLOS ONE, October 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0046544
Pubmed ID
Authors

Peter D. Sozou, Geraldine M. Hartshorne

Abstract

An important problem in reproductive medicine is deciding when people who have failed to become pregnant without medical assistance should begin investigation and treatment. This study describes a computational approach to determining what can be deduced about a couple's future chances of pregnancy from the number of menstrual cycles over which they have been trying to conceive. The starting point is that a couple's fertility is inherently uncertain. This uncertainty is modelled as a probability distribution for the chance of conceiving in each menstrual cycle. We have developed a general numerical computational method, which uses Bayes' theorem to generate a posterior distribution for a couple's chance of conceiving in each cycle, conditional on the number of previous cycles of attempted conception. When various metrics of a couple's expected chances of pregnancy were computed as a function of the number of cycles over which they had been trying to conceive, we found good fits to observed data on time to pregnancy for different populations. The commonly-used standard of 12 cycles of non-conception as an indicator of subfertility was found to be reasonably robust, though a larger or smaller number of cycles may be more appropriate depending on the population from which a couple is drawn and the precise subfertility metric which is most relevant, for example the probability of conception in the next cycle or the next 12 cycles. We have also applied our computational method to model the impact of female reproductive ageing. Results indicate that, for women over the age of 35, it may be appropriate to start investigation and treatment more quickly than for younger women. Ignoring reproductive decline during the period of attempted conception added up to two cycles to the computed number of cycles before reaching a metric of subfertility.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 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 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
France 1 1%
Unknown 72 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 12%
Student > Bachelor 8 11%
Researcher 7 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Other 12 16%
Unknown 22 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 25%
Psychology 7 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 5%
Other 15 20%
Unknown 21 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 70. 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 10 April 2024.
All research outputs
#625,546
of 25,918,104 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#8,450
of 225,093 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,340
of 195,342 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#126
of 4,584 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,918,104 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 225,093 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 195,342 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,584 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.