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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs): Evaluation of evidence to support public policy development
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Reproductive Health, November 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1742-4755-11-76 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alexa A Nardelli, Tania Stafinski, Tarek Motan, Kristin Klein, Devidas Menon |
| Abstract |
Over the years, IVF/ICSI protocols have continued to evolve with efforts to improve outcomes. As a result, treatment success may be related to certain procedural factors, including number of embryos transferred and stage at which they are transferred. This review aims to assess the safety and effectiveness of IVF/ICSI in comparison to spontaneous conception and less invasive ARTs and the impact of procedure-related factors on the outcomes of IVF/ICSI in order to support the development of local clinical and policy guidance. Following Cochrane Collaboration guidelines and the PRISMA statement, a comprehensive systematic review of literature examining the impact of procedural characteristics on the safety or effectiveness of IVF/ICSI from 2007 to date was performed. 33 systematic reviews and 3 primary studies evaluating the impact of procedural differences, IVF/ICSI in comparison to less invasive ARTs, and ARTs in comparison to spontaneous conception were found. IVF was shown to offer significant benefits over no treatment and IUI in achieving pregnancy and live birth among couples with endometriosis or unexplained infertility. Frozen and blastocyst-stage embryo transfers were as effective as fresh and cleavage-stage embryo transfers, respectively. In comparison to single embryo transfer, double embryo transfer significantly increased pregnancy, live birth and multiple pregnancy/birth rates. IVF/ICSI was associated with more complications during pregnancy and delivery, and in infants compared to naturally conceived pregnancies, particularly when multiple embryo transfer was used. Frozen embryo transfer had fewer adverse events during pregnancy and delivery than fresh embryo transfer, and was at least as safe in terms of infant outcomes. The potential complications of IVF/ICSI may be minimized through procedural choices, but such choices often impact effectiveness. Thus, in developing clinical and policy guidance around IVF/ICSI, the risk-benefit trade-offs patients and providers are willing to accept must be carefully considered. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 125 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Russia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 124 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 22 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 19 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 16 | 13% |
| Other | 8 | 6% |
| Researcher | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 16 | 13% |
| Unknown | 38 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 41 | 33% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 9 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 4% |
| Other | 17 | 14% |
| Unknown | 39 | 31% |
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 11 February 2015.
All research outputs
#15,322,159
of 22,789,076 outputs
Outputs from Reproductive Health
#1,107
of 1,411 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#153,310
of 262,848 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Reproductive Health
#23
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,789,076 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,411 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.0. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 262,848 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.