Ina N. Cholst

1.7k total citations
37 papers, 1.1k citations indexed

About

Ina N. Cholst is a scholar working on Reproductive Medicine, Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health and Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health. According to data from OpenAlex, Ina N. Cholst has authored 37 papers receiving a total of 1.1k indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 24 papers in Reproductive Medicine, 21 papers in Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health and 16 papers in Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health. Recurrent topics in Ina N. Cholst's work include Reproductive Health and Technologies (18 papers), Assisted Reproductive Technology and Twin Pregnancy (15 papers) and Reproductive Biology and Fertility (12 papers). Ina N. Cholst is often cited by papers focused on Reproductive Health and Technologies (18 papers), Assisted Reproductive Technology and Twin Pregnancy (15 papers) and Reproductive Biology and Fertility (12 papers). Ina N. Cholst collaborates with scholars based in United States, Israel and Canada. Ina N. Cholst's co-authors include Zev Rosenwaks, Roberto Amador, Herman J. Weinreb, Howard Fillit, Victoria N. Luine, Bruce S. McEwen, John B. Zabriskie, Kara N. Maxwell, Harold E. Fox and Susan F. Steinberg and has published in prestigious journals such as New England Journal of Medicine, The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism and Cancer.

In The Last Decade

Ina N. Cholst

32 papers receiving 1.0k citations

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late) cites · hero ref

Name h Career Trend Papers Cites
Ina N. Cholst United States 15 407 301 277 265 264 37 1.1k
Lisette Stolk Netherlands 21 184 0.5× 231 0.8× 266 1.0× 226 0.9× 182 0.7× 34 1.5k
Risto Erkkola Finland 17 176 0.4× 223 0.7× 345 1.2× 166 0.6× 365 1.4× 41 1.1k
Joan DiMartino-Nardi United States 23 546 1.3× 271 0.9× 246 0.9× 335 1.3× 926 3.5× 40 1.6k
P. Fioretti Italy 27 638 1.6× 429 1.4× 423 1.5× 247 0.9× 772 2.9× 133 2.2k
Bumin Nuri Dündar Türkiye 23 95 0.2× 194 0.6× 225 0.8× 190 0.7× 472 1.8× 112 1.5k
Wolfram E. Nolten United States 15 541 1.3× 193 0.6× 586 2.1× 229 0.9× 659 2.5× 34 1.7k
Catherine Dacou‐Voutetakis Greece 27 295 0.7× 158 0.5× 603 2.2× 299 1.1× 1.1k 4.2× 99 2.1k
Sara A. DiVall United States 25 799 2.0× 446 1.5× 332 1.2× 463 1.7× 715 2.7× 42 2.0k
Sten Rosberg Sweden 21 198 0.5× 174 0.6× 330 1.2× 424 1.6× 926 3.5× 50 1.7k
Laëtitia Martinerie France 18 188 0.5× 107 0.4× 309 1.1× 205 0.8× 635 2.4× 66 1.3k

Countries citing papers authored by Ina N. Cholst

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Ina N. Cholst's research. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by Ina N. Cholst with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Ina N. Cholst more than expected).

Fields of papers citing papers by Ina N. Cholst

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Ina N. Cholst. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by Ina N. Cholst. The network helps show where Ina N. Cholst may publish in the future.

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Ina N. Cholst

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Ina N. Cholst. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Ina N. Cholst based on the total number of citations received by their joint publications. Widths of edges represent the number of papers authors have co-authored together. Node borders signify the number of papers an author published with Ina N. Cholst. Ina N. Cholst is excluded from the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown
1.
Meyer, Laura, et al.. (2015). Risk factors for a suboptimal response to gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist trigger during in vitro fertilization cycles. Fertility and Sterility. 104(3). 637–642. 79 indexed citations
2.
Cholst, Ina N.. (2014). Oncofertility: Preservation of Reproductive Potential. ˜The œDe Paul law review. 61(3). 763.
3.
Rubin, Lisa R., et al.. (2014). ‘TheBRCAClock is Ticking!’: Negotiating medical concerns and reproductive goals in preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Human Fertility. 17(3). 159–164. 22 indexed citations
4.
Rubin, Lisa R., Inmaculada de Melo‐Martín, Zev Rosenwaks, & Ina N. Cholst. (2014). Once you're choosing, nobody's perfect: is more information necessarily better in oocyte donor selection?. Reproductive BioMedicine Online. 30(3). 311–318. 9 indexed citations
5.
6.
Hurley, Karen, Lisa R. Rubin, Allison Werner‐Lin, et al.. (2012). Incorporating information regarding preimplantation genetic diagnosis into discussions concerning testing and risk management for BRCA1/2 mutations. Cancer. 118(24). 6270–6277. 27 indexed citations
7.
Goldschlag, Dan, et al.. (2010). The use of anti mullerian hormone as a predictor for IVF outcome in egg donors. Fertility and Sterility. 94(4). S26–S26. 1 indexed citations
8.
Cholst, Ina N., et al.. (2010). Should all oocyte donors receive prophylactic antibiotics for retrieval?. Fertility and Sterility. 94(7). 2935–2937. 14 indexed citations
9.
Maxwell, Kara N., Ina N. Cholst, & Zev Rosenwaks. (2008). The incidence of both serious and minor complications in young women undergoing oocyte donation. Fertility and Sterility. 90(6). 2165–2171. 88 indexed citations
10.
Melo‐Martín, Inmaculada de & Ina N. Cholst. (2007). Reply: Ethical issues surrounding the crypreservation of human oocytes. Fertility and Sterility. 88(4). 1016–1017. 1 indexed citations
11.
Melo‐Martín, Inmaculada de & Ina N. Cholst. (2007). Researching human oocyte cryopreservation: ethical issues. Fertility and Sterility. 89(3). 523–528. 14 indexed citations
12.
Costantini-Ferrando, M.F., et al.. (2006). P-597. Fertility and Sterility. 86(3). S355–S355.
13.
Josephs, Lawrence, et al.. (2001). Outcome of a cohort of anonymous oocyte donor applicants and predictors of voluntary withdrawal.. Fertility and Sterility. 76(3). S25–S25. 1 indexed citations
14.
Moomjy, Maureen, et al.. (1999). Oocyte donation: insights into implantation. Fertility and Sterility. 71(1). 15–21. 35 indexed citations
15.
Spandorfer, Steven D., Maureen Moomjy, Owen Davis, et al.. (1998). Oocyte donation: does a previous attempt affect a subsequent attempt?. Fertility and Sterility. 70(2). 222–226. 8 indexed citations
16.
Applegarth, Linda D., et al.. (1995). Families created through ovum donation: A preliminary investigation of obstetrical outcome and psychosocial adjustment. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics. 12(9). 574–580. 32 indexed citations
17.
Davis, Owen, et al.. (1989). The incidence of luteal phase defect in normal, fertile women, determined by serial endometrial biopsies. Fertility and Sterility. 51(4). 582–586. 43 indexed citations
18.
Sealey, Jean E., et al.. (1988). Sequential Changes in Plasma Luteinizing Hormone and Plasma Prorenin during the Menstrual Cycle. Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey. 43(2). 103–106. 4 indexed citations
19.
Berkeley, Alan S., et al.. (1988). Pretreatment with a subcutaneous gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist in an in vitro fertilization cycle resulting in a viable pregnancy. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics. 5(4). 234–236. 3 indexed citations
20.
DeCherney, Alan H., Ina N. Cholst, & Frederick Naftolin. (1981). Structure and function of the fallopian tubes following exposure to diethylstilbestrol (DES) during gestation. Fertility and Sterility. 36(6). 741–745. 50 indexed citations

Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.

Explore authors with similar magnitude of impact

Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Lisette Stolk Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Risto Erkkola Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Joan DiMartino-Nardi Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by P. Fioretti Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Bumin Nuri Dündar Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Wolfram E. Nolten Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Catherine Dacou‐Voutetakis Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Sara A. DiVall Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Sten Rosberg Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Laëtitia Martinerie
Rankless by CCL
2026