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 |
Sperm cryopreservation incidence in men with testicular cancer: towards a stabilization in testicular cancer incidence? Results from the CECOS network
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Basic and Clinical Andrology, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12610-018-0075-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marie Walschaerts, Louis Bujan, Cécile Chouquet, Valentine Rossi, Jean-Claude Juillard, Patrick Thonneau, Fédération Française des CECOS |
| Abstract |
Testicular cancer (TC) represents 1% of all new male cancer cases but remains the most frequent cancer in adolescents and young adults in industrialized countries. In this study, we assessed time trends in use of sperm cryopreservation by men with TC from 1990 to 2013 in France. We collected data from patients diagnosed with TC who underwent sperm cryopreservation in the French national network of sperm banks. Trends in the incidence of sperm cryopreservation were estimated through two statistical models: the commonly used Poisson regression model and the Verhulst model. Between 1990 and 2013, the overall incidence of sperm cryopreservation rose from 1.73 to 5.57 per 100,000 person-years. Poisson regression predicted an incidence of 9 per 100,000 [95% CI = 8.66-9.34] in 2020. However, since 2005, the observed sperm cryopreservation rate seems to be attenuating. The Verhulst model predicted an incidence of 6 per 100,000 after 2020. Limitations include the impossibility of analyzing age-standardized incidence. Based on the Verhulst model, results suggest that it is still relevant to follow up TC incidence and sperm cryopreservation in order to confirm or refute the potential decrease already observed in this disease. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 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 5 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 5 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 2 | 40% |
| Researcher | 1 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 1 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 60% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
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 August 2018.
All research outputs
#22,767,715
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Basic and Clinical Andrology
#126
of 161 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#298,702
of 341,622 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Basic and Clinical Andrology
#2
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 161 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 24.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 341,622 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 2 of them.