Mentions
Extended reach
Total likes
Video views
AI synopsis
This collection of discussions mainly highlights the publication's recent release, with the tone being professional and neutral, exemplified by the straightforward announcement of its appearance in a reputable journal. The words used emphasize the research's credibility and relevance, but there is little indication of controversy or strong emotional reactions, which aligns with moderate interest and engagement levels.
The discussion seems neutral, with the main post announcing the publication without explicit opinions, indicating neither strong support nor disagreement.
The mention of the publication in an academic journal suggests some interest but limited enthusiasm, as the focus is more informational than provocative.
The post invites academic or professional interest but does not show deep discussion or critical analysis, reflecting moderate engagement.
While the publication advances knowledge in digital fertility tools, the discussion itself appears to have limited immediate influence on broader societal attitudes.
Our paper, “Time to pregnancy recognition among users of an FDA-cleared fertility application” has been published in the Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology @tandfonline
Are you tracking your cycle correctly? Only 13 percent of women ovulate on day 14, impacting fertility predictions. This video explains how ovulation tracking works, its effectiveness, and how understanding your body…
Our paper, “Time to pregnancy recognition among users of an FDA-cleared fertility application” has been published in the Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology @tandfonline