The impact of the woman's age on the success of standard and donor in vitro fertilization
Fertility and Sterility, ISSN: 0015-0282, Vol: 67, Issue: 4, Page: 702-710
1997
- 72Citations
- 26Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations72
- Citation Indexes71
- 71
- CrossRef57
- Clinical Citations1
- 1
- Captures26
- Readers26
- 26
Article Description
Objective: To study the effect of the age of the woman who provides the oocytes or who receives the embryos on results of IVF-ET. Design: Historical cohort study. Multivariate regression analysis was used to study the age effect continuously and after adjustment for confounding. Setting: Patients of the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California. Patient(s): Couples who underwent standard (n = 277) or donor IVF-ET (n = 294) between January 1991 and July 1995. Intervention(s): One cycle of standard or donor IVF-ET. Main Outcome Measure(s): Successive IVF outcomes from number of oocytes to ongoing pregnancy and several measures of pregnancy loss. Result(s): The number of oocytes decreased with aging of the oocyte provider. More women who received oocytes from donors aged 20 to 23 years had at least one good embryo transferred than women who received oocytes from older donors. The age of the woman who received the embryos had no effect on IVF outcomes. In women > 40 years who underwent standard IVF, the probability of pregnancy decreased. No such relationships were observed for donor IVF, but all the oocyte donors were younger. Conclusion(s): An age effect for ongoing pregnancy was only found in women > 40 years who underwent standard IVF independent of the lower number of oocytes and suggests decreasing oocyte quality.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0015028297813702; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0015-0282(97)81370-2; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=0343581227&origin=inward; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9093198; http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0015028297813702; http://api.elsevier.com/content/article/PII:S0015028297813702?httpAccept=text/xml; http://api.elsevier.com/content/article/PII:S0015028297813702?httpAccept=text/plain; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0015028297813702; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0015-0282%2897%2981370-2; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0015-0282%2897%2981370-2
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know