↓ Skip to main content

Clinical review of 24–35 year olds conceived with and without in vitro fertilization: study protocol

Overview of attention for article published in Reproductive Health, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
81 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
Clinical review of 24–35 year olds conceived with and without in vitro fertilization: study protocol
Published in
Reproductive Health, September 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12978-017-0377-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sharon Lewis, Joanne Kennedy, David Burgner, Robert McLachlan, Sarath Ranganathan, Karin Hammarberg, Richard Saffery, David J. Amor, Michael M. H. Cheung, Lex W. Doyle, Markus Juonala, Susan Donath, John McBain, Jane Halliday

Abstract

Children conceived by assisted reproductive technologies (ART) currently comprise 4% of Australian births. The manipulation of biological parameters related to fertilization and implantation are integral to successful ART but potentially pose a risk to the longer-term health of the offspring. There is consensus that many common adult health problems (particularly cardiovascular, metabolic and respiratory conditions) have their origins in early life, possibly before birth, and that risk trajectories track through childhood until clinical disease manifests in adulthood. Early life epigenetic variation may play a role in this process. However little is known about the long-term health of individuals conceived by ART. In a previous study, based on telephone-interviews, we found that young adults conceived by in vitro fertilization (IVF) had significantly more maternal reported atopic respiratory, endocrine, nutritional, and metabolic conditions than non-IVF conceived matched controls. Here we outline the protocol for a follow-up biomedical assessment of this cohort and a questionnaire to obtain information on potential confounders. We are conducting a clinical review of an existing, well characterised cohort comprising 547 IVF-conceived adults and 549 matched controls. We are measuring cardiovascular intermediate phenotypes, metabolic parameters and respiratory function, complemented by epigenome-wide DNA methylation analysis. A pilot study demonstrated the feasibility of our proposed protocol and its acceptability to participants. Participants attend a 2-3 h clinical assessment and complete a study-specific online questionnaire. Measurements include: 1) cardiovascular phenotypes: carotid artery intima-media thickness and distensibility, retinal vascular calibre, resting blood pressure, pulse wave velocity and pulse wave analysis; 2) respiratory function: spirometry, plethysmography, multiple breath washout; 3) auxology: height, weight, waist circumference, bio-impedance. Blood is collected for 4) biomarkers of cardiometabolic profile including inflammatory markers and 5) epigenetic analysis. Recruitment for this clinical review is challenging as many of the participants have moved to regional, interstate or international locations. Additionally, many female participants are pregnant or breastfeeding, and are therefore ineligible. Nevertheless, comprehensive strategies have been developed to optimize recruitment. Given the increasing use of IVF and related technologies, the potential long-term consequences for risk of common adult diseases is an important clinical and public health issue.

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 81 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 81 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 11%
Student > Bachelor 9 11%
Researcher 8 10%
Student > Master 8 10%
Other 5 6%
Other 14 17%
Unknown 28 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 9%
Unspecified 5 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Computer Science 3 4%
Other 9 11%
Unknown 34 42%
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 24 January 2024.
All research outputs
#17,240,811
of 25,318,210 outputs
Outputs from Reproductive Health
#1,244
of 1,561 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#208,407
of 324,496 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Reproductive Health
#32
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,318,210 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,561 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.9. 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 324,496 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.