↓ Skip to main content

Granulosa Cell Apoptosis in the Ovarian Follicle—A Changing View

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in endocrinology, March 2018
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 (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
35 X users

Readers on

mendeley
118 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
Granulosa Cell Apoptosis in the Ovarian Follicle—A Changing View
Published in
Frontiers in endocrinology, March 2018
DOI 10.3389/fendo.2018.00061
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sheena L. P. Regan, Phil G. Knight, John L. Yovich, Yee Leung, Frank Arfuso, Arun Dharmarajan

Abstract

Recent studies challenge the previous view that apoptosis within the granulosa cells of the maturing ovarian follicle is a reflection of aging and consequently a marker for poor quality of the contained oocyte. On the contrary, apoptosis within the granulosa cells is an integral part of normal development and has limited predictive capability regarding oocyte quality or the ensuing pregnancy rate in in vitro fertilization programs. This review article covers our revised understanding of the process of apoptosis within the ovarian follicle, its three phenotypes, the major signaling pathways underlying apoptosis as well as the associated mitochondrial pathways.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 35 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 118 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 118 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 14%
Student > Master 17 14%
Student > Bachelor 8 7%
Other 8 7%
Researcher 6 5%
Other 14 12%
Unknown 48 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 25 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 9%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 8 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 2%
Other 7 6%
Unknown 50 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. 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 06 January 2021.
All research outputs
#1,852,210
of 26,732,897 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in endocrinology
#507
of 13,647 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,790
of 350,726 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in endocrinology
#8
of 164 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,732,897 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 13,647 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 350,726 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 164 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.