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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Pronuclear morphology evaluation for fresh in vitro fertilization (IVF) and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles: a systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Ovarian Research, September 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1757-2215-6-64 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alessia Nicoli, Stefano Palomba, Francesco Capodanno, Maria Fini, Angela Falbo, Giovanni Battista La Sala |
| Abstract |
The current systematic review was aimed to assess the effectiveness of the zygote morphology evaluation in fresh in vitro fertilization (IVF) and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles. All available studies reporting on zygote morphology and clinical and/or biological outcomes were analyzed. Forty studies were included in the final analysis. Fourteen different zygote scoring systems were employed. Zygote morphology correlated significantly with embryo quality and cleavage, blastocyst stage, embryonic chromosome status, in a high proportion of the studies which assessed the specific outcome [15/25 (60%), 15/20 (75%), 7/8 (87.5%), 6/6 (100%), respectively]. On the other hand, only a reduced proportion of papers showed a statistically significant relationship between implantation, pregnancy and delivery/live-birth rates and zygote morphology score [12/23 (52.2%), 12/25 (48%), 1/4 (25%), respectively]. In conclusion, our findings demonstrate the lack of conclusive data on the clinical efficacy of the zygote morphology evaluation in fresh IVF/ICSI cycles, even if biological results showing a good relationship with embryo viability suggest a role in cycles in which the transfer/freezing is performed at day 1. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 38 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 21% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 11 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 28% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 13% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 13% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 3% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Unknown | 12 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 September 2013.
All research outputs
#5,850,196
of 22,721,584 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Ovarian Research
#76
of 582 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,652
of 198,485 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Ovarian Research
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,721,584 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 582 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 198,485 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 74% 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