↓ Skip to main content

The OPTIMIST study: optimisation of cost effectiveness through individualised FSH stimulation dosages for IVF treatment. A randomised controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Women's Health, September 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
48 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
102 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
The OPTIMIST study: optimisation of cost effectiveness through individualised FSH stimulation dosages for IVF treatment. A randomised controlled trial
Published in
BMC Women's Health, September 2012
DOI 10.1186/1472-6874-12-29
Pubmed ID
Authors

Theodora C van Tilborg, Marinus JC Eijkemans, Joop SE Laven, Carolien AM Koks, Jan Peter de Bruin, Gabrielle J Scheffer, Ron JT van Golde, Kathrin Fleischer, Annemieke Hoek, Annemiek W Nap, Walter KH Kuchenbecker, Petra A Manger, Egbert A Brinkhuis, Arne M van Heusden, Alexander V Sluijmer, Arie Verhoeff, Marcel HA van Hooff, Jaap Friederich, Jesper MJ Smeenk, Janet Kwee, Harold R Verhoeve, Cornelis B Lambalk, Frans M Helmerhorst, Fulco van der Veen, Ben Willem J Mol, Helen L Torrance, Frank JM Broekmans

Abstract

Costs of in vitro fertilisation (IVF) are high, which is partly due to the use of follicle stimulating hormone (FSH). FSH is usually administered in a standard dose. However, due to differences in ovarian reserve between women, ovarian response also differs with potential negative consequences on pregnancy rates. A Markov decision-analytic model showed that FSH dose individualisation according to ovarian reserve is likely to be cost-effective in women who are eligible for IVF. However, this has never been confirmed in a large randomised controlled trial (RCT). The aim of the present study is to assess whether an individualised FSH dose regime based on an ovarian reserve test (ORT) is more cost-effective than a standard dose regime.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 98 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 16%
Researcher 15 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Student > Bachelor 6 6%
Other 21 21%
Unknown 24 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 45 44%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 5%
Social Sciences 4 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 3%
Psychology 3 3%
Other 14 14%
Unknown 28 27%
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 27 September 2012.
All research outputs
#18,316,001
of 22,679,690 outputs
Outputs from BMC Women's Health
#1,472
of 1,784 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#129,605
of 170,567 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Women's Health
#14
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,679,690 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,784 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.7. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% 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 170,567 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.