↓ Skip to main content

Development and initial validation of a fertility experiences questionnaire

Overview of attention for article published in Reproductive Health, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
36 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
Development and initial validation of a fertility experiences questionnaire
Published in
Reproductive Health, July 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12978-015-0054-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

F. Scarlett Thomas, Joseph B. Stanford, Jessica N. Sanders, Shawn E. Gurtcheff, Mark Gibson, Christina A. Porucznik, Sara E. Simonsen

Abstract

Many women throughout the world have history of subfertility (resolved or unresolved), but much remains unknown about services and treatments chosen. We developed a mixed-mode fertility experiences questionnaire (FEQ) in 2009 through literature review and iterative pilot work to optimize question format and mode of administration. The focus of the FEQ is to collect data retrospectively on time at risk for pregnancy, fertility treatments received and declined, pregnancy, time to pregnancy and pregnancy outcomes. We conducted a validation of key elements of the FEQ with comparison to medical records in 2009 and 2010. The validation sample was selected from women initially seen at a specialized fertility treatment center in Utah in 2004. The FEQ was optimized with two components: 1) written (paper or web-based), self-administered, followed by 2) telephone- administered questions. In 63 patients analyzed, high levels of correlation were identified between patient self-report and medical records for the use of intrauterine insemination and assisted reproductive technology, pregnancy and live birth histories, time at risk for pregnancy and time to pregnancy. There was low correlation between medical records and self-report for the use of oral ovulation drugs and injectable ovulation drugs. Compared to the medical record, the FEQ was over 90 % sensitive for all elements, except injectable ovulation drugs (70 % sensitivity). The FEQ accurately captured elements of fertility treatment history at 5-6 years after the first visit to a specialty clinic.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 36 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 17%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Professor 3 8%
Other 2 6%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 10 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 8%
Psychology 2 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Computer Science 1 3%
Other 7 19%
Unknown 11 31%
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 21 July 2015.
All research outputs
#15,340,005
of 22,817,213 outputs
Outputs from Reproductive Health
#1,107
of 1,413 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#137,579
of 234,770 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Reproductive Health
#24
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,817,213 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 1,413 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 234,770 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 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.