↓ Skip to main content

The Human Oocyte Preservation Experience (HOPE) Registry: evaluation of cryopreservation techniques and oocyte source on outcomes

Overview of attention for article published in Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
74 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
The Human Oocyte Preservation Experience (HOPE) Registry: evaluation of cryopreservation techniques and oocyte source on outcomes
Published in
Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology, February 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12958-017-0228-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zsolt Peter Nagy, Robert E. Anderson, Eve C. Feinberg, Brooke Hayward, Mary C. Mahony

Abstract

This prospective, Phase IV, multicenter, observational registry of assisted reproductive technology clinics in the USA studied outcomes of first cycles using thawed/warmed cryopreserved (by slow-freezing/vitrification) oocytes (autologous or donor). Patients were followed up through implantation, clinical pregnancy, and birth outcomes. The main outcome measure was live birth rate (LBR), defined as the ratio of live births to oocytes thawed/warmed minus the number of embryos cryopreserved for each cycle, averaged over all thawing cycles. Clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) was also evaluated, and was defined as the presence of a fetal sac with heart activity, as detected by ultrasound scan performed on Day 35-42 after embryo transfer. A total of 16 centers enrolled 204 patients; data from 193 patients were available for analyses. For donor oocytes, in the slow-freezing (n = 40) versus vitrification (n = 94) groups, respectively, CPR and LBR were significantly different: 32.4% versus 62.6%, and 25.0% versus 52.1%; outcomes from Day 3 transfers did not differ significantly. For vitrified oocytes, in the autologous (n = 46) versus donor (n = 94) group, respectively, CPR and LBR were significantly different: 30.0% versus 62.6% and 17.4% versus 52.1%. This was largely due to a significant difference in CPR with Day 5/6 transfers. In two subgroup data analyses, in women who received cryopreserved oocytes from donors, CPR and LBR were significantly higher in cycles using oocytes cryopreserved via vitrification versus slow-freezing, reflecting differences in methodologies and more Day 5/6 transfers; in women who received vitrified oocytes, CPR and LBR were significantly higher in cycles using donor versus autologous oocytes with Day 5/6 transfers. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00699400 . Registered June 13, 2008.

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 readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 74 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 14%
Student > Bachelor 9 12%
Other 8 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 8%
Student > Master 6 8%
Other 13 18%
Unknown 22 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 32%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Arts and Humanities 1 1%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 25 34%
Attention Score in Context

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 16 March 2017.
All research outputs
#18,538,272
of 22,959,818 outputs
Outputs from Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology
#668
of 981 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#310,313
of 420,270 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology
#8
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,959,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 981 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 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 420,270 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.