↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

In vitro fertilisation for unexplained subfertility.

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
49 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 Mendeley
Title
In vitro fertilisation for unexplained subfertility.
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd003357.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pandian Z, Gibreel A, Bhattacharya S

Abstract

In vitro fertilisation (IVF) is a widely accepted treatment for unexplained infertility (NICE 2004), which affects up to a third of all infertile couples. With estimated live birth rates (LBRs) per cycle varying from 33.1% in women aged under 35 years down to 12.5% in women aged between 40 and 42 years (HFEA 2011), its effectiveness has not been rigorously evaluated in comparison with other treatments. With increasing awareness of the role of expectant management, less-invasive procedures such as intrauterine insemination (IUI), and concerns about multiple pregnancies and costs associated with IVF, it is important to evaluate the effectiveness of IVF against other treatment options in couples with unexplained infertility.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 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 > Bachelor 6 17%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 14%
Researcher 4 11%
Other 7 19%
Unknown 2 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 67%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Psychology 2 6%
Social Sciences 2 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 4 11%

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 22 April 2012.
All research outputs
#2,744,622
of 3,628,675 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,563
of 6,234 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,928
of 72,614 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#70
of 87 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 3,628,675 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,234 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% 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 72,614 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 87 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.