↓ Skip to main content

Absolute position versus relative position in embryo transfer: a randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 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
Absolute position versus relative position in embryo transfer: a randomized controlled trial
Published in
Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology, July 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12958-015-0072-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hwang Kwon, Dong-Hee Choi, Eun-Kyung Kim

Abstract

Meta-analysis revealed that embryo placement 20 mm from the fundal endometrial surface resulted in higher pregnancy rate, ongoing pregnancy rate, and live birth rate compared with placement 10 mm from the fundal endometrial surface. Pregnancy and implantation rates according to relative position were higher when the catheter tip was positioned close to the middle of the endometrial cavity. The aim of the current study is to evaluate differences in implantation and pregnancy rates if the site of embryo transfer is 2 cm distance from the fundal endometrium (DFE) compared to the midpoint of the endometrial cavity length (ECL). Patients were randomized to one of two groups: in group A (n = 98, 98 IVF-ET cycles), the embryo transfer catheter tip was positioned 2 cm DFE, while that in group B (n = 97, 97 IVF-ET cycles) was positioned at the midpoint of the ECL. We compared pregnancy outcomes of implantation rate, chemical pregnancy rate, clinical pregnancy rate, ongoing pregnancy rate, ectopic pregnancy rate, and miscarriage rate in the two groups. Analysis of implantation rate (19.5 ± 27.7 vs. 21.7 ± 32.6; p = 0.6), chemical pregnancy rate (51 % vs. 50.5 %; p = 0.94), clinical pregnancy rate (35.7 % vs. 38.1 %; p = 0.73), ongoing pregnancy rate (31.6 % vs. 30.9 %; p = 0.92), ectopic pregnancy rate (8.6 % vs. 2.7 %; p = 0.35), and miscarriage rate (11.4 % vs. 16.2 %; 0.74) revealed comparable results for both groups. Implantation and pregnancy rates were not influenced by the site of the ET catheter tip being 2 cm DFE compared to at the midpoint of the ECL. ISRCTN15972342.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 29%
Researcher 4 19%
Student > Bachelor 1 5%
Unspecified 1 5%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 7 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 33%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 10%
Unspecified 1 5%
Environmental Science 1 5%
Computer Science 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 8 38%
Attention Score in Context

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 10 August 2015.
All research outputs
#5,747,403
of 22,826,360 outputs
Outputs from Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology
#206
of 974 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,042
of 263,433 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology
#4
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,826,360 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 974 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 263,433 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 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.