↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Timed intercourse for couples trying to conceive

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
6 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
153 Mendeley
Title
Timed intercourse for couples trying to conceive
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2015
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd011345.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marlies Manders, Luke McLindon, Brittany Schulze, Michael M Beckmann, Jan AM Kremer, Cindy Farquhar

Abstract

Fertility problems are very common, as subfertility affects about 10% to 15% of couples trying to conceive. There are many factors that may impact a couple's ability to conceive and one of these may be incorrect timing of intercourse. Conception is only possible from approximately five days before up to several hours after ovulation. Therefore, to be effective, intercourse must take place during this fertile period. 'Timed intercourse' is the practice of prospectively identifying ovulation and, thus, the fertile period to increase the likelihood of conception. Whilst timed intercourse may increase conception rates and reduce unnecessary intervention and costs, there may be associated adverse aspects including time consumption and stress. Ovulation prediction methods used for timing intercourse include urinary hormone measurement (luteinizing hormone (LH), estrogen), tracking basal body temperatures, cervical mucus investigation, calendar charting and ultrasonography. This review considered the evidence from randomised controlled trials for the use of timed intercourse on positive pregnancy outcomes.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 153 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 152 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 30 20%
Researcher 24 16%
Student > Bachelor 19 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 12%
Student > Postgraduate 8 5%
Other 25 16%
Unknown 29 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 49 32%
Psychology 21 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 8%
Social Sciences 9 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 3%
Other 17 11%
Unknown 39 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 26 February 2019.
All research outputs
#1,017,898
of 15,218,339 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,909
of 11,162 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,569
of 261,287 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#81
of 249 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,218,339 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,162 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 261,287 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 249 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.