M. Duke

503 total citations
33 papers, 357 citations indexed

About

M. Duke is a scholar working on Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health and Reproductive Medicine. According to data from OpenAlex, M. Duke has authored 33 papers receiving a total of 357 indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 21 papers in Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health, 18 papers in Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health and 14 papers in Reproductive Medicine. Recurrent topics in M. Duke's work include Assisted Reproductive Technology and Twin Pregnancy (18 papers), Reproductive Biology and Fertility (16 papers) and Prenatal Screening and Diagnostics (14 papers). M. Duke is often cited by papers focused on Assisted Reproductive Technology and Twin Pregnancy (18 papers), Reproductive Biology and Fertility (16 papers) and Prenatal Screening and Diagnostics (14 papers). M. Duke collaborates with scholars based in United States, Australia and Egypt. M. Duke's co-authors include Alan B. Copperman, B. Sandler, Martha Luna, L. Grunfeld, J. Barritt, Tanmoy Mukherjee, J. Rodriguez-Purata, Joseph Lee, D. Ezcurra and Jane Ruman and has published in prestigious journals such as The American Journal of Human Genetics, The Journal of Urology and Fertility and Sterility.

In The Last Decade

M. Duke

29 papers receiving 343 citations

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

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

Name h Career Trend Papers Cites
M. Duke United States 8 241 225 199 50 28 33 357
Thamara Viloria Spain 8 224 0.9× 196 0.9× 152 0.8× 84 1.7× 23 0.8× 18 343
Martha Luna United States 10 259 1.1× 239 1.1× 315 1.6× 40 0.8× 31 1.1× 18 419
Sonia Brahem Tunisia 13 400 1.7× 180 0.8× 438 2.2× 57 1.1× 12 0.4× 15 564
Pilar Gámiz Spain 9 353 1.5× 229 1.0× 268 1.3× 81 1.6× 4 0.1× 14 447
Masayuki Kinutani Japan 12 362 1.5× 292 1.3× 278 1.4× 120 2.4× 3 0.1× 21 528
Hiromitsu Hattori Japan 8 172 0.7× 198 0.9× 158 0.8× 91 1.8× 6 0.2× 13 309
Koichi Kyono Japan 14 443 1.8× 239 1.1× 420 2.1× 152 3.0× 4 0.1× 53 614
Selwyn P. Oskowitz United States 14 485 2.0× 266 1.2× 484 2.4× 52 1.0× 5 0.2× 31 624
Brandon Bankowski United States 9 246 1.0× 302 1.3× 296 1.5× 41 0.8× 5 0.2× 10 457
Leyre Herrero Spain 6 283 1.2× 149 0.7× 269 1.4× 53 1.1× 4 0.1× 11 344

Countries citing papers authored by M. Duke

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of M. Duke'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 M. Duke with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites M. Duke more than expected).

Fields of papers citing papers by M. Duke

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by M. Duke. 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 M. Duke. The network helps show where M. Duke may publish in the future.

Co-authorship network of co-authors of M. Duke

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of M. Duke. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of M. Duke 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 M. Duke. M. Duke 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.
2.
Sun, Siqi, Mary E. Haywood, Charles R. Wageman, et al.. (2023). Identifying risk variants for embryo aneuploidy using ultra-low coverage whole-genome sequencing from preimplantation genetic testing. The American Journal of Human Genetics. 110(12). 2092–2102. 6 indexed citations
3.
Nazem, T.G., L. Sekhon, Joseph A. Lee, et al.. (2018). The correlation between morphology and implantation of euploid human blastocysts. Reproductive BioMedicine Online. 38(2). 169–176. 44 indexed citations
4.
Sekhon, L., et al.. (2017). Is reproductive potential compromised when embryos are re-biopsied?. Fertility and Sterility. 107(3). e16–e17. 1 indexed citations
5.
Sekhon, L., et al.. (2017). Targeted next generation sequencing (NGS) identifies higher proportions of monosomies in the larger chromosome groups than QPCR. Fertility and Sterility. 108(3). e283–e283. 1 indexed citations
6.
Rodriguez-Purata, J., L. Sekhon, M. Duke, et al.. (2016). Does severe teratozoospermia is correlated with embryonic aneuploidy rates?. Fertility and Sterility. 106(3). e227–e228. 1 indexed citations
7.
Rodriguez-Purata, J., et al.. (2016). Does vitrification day matter: euploid embryos with identical day 5/6 morphology grade and frozen embryo transfer cycle outcomes. Fertility and Sterility. 106(3). e357–e358. 1 indexed citations
8.
Rodriguez-Purata, J., Joseph Lee, M. Duke, et al.. (2016). Reproductive outcome is optimized by genomic embryo screening, vitrification, and subsequent transfer into a prepared synchronous endometrium. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics. 33(3). 401–412. 42 indexed citations
9.
Rodriguez-Purata, J., et al.. (2016). Fertilization rates are not improved by use of ICSI versus conventional insemination in IVF cases using donor sperm. Fertility and Sterility. 106(3). e185–e186. 1 indexed citations
10.
11.
Duke, M., et al.. (2014). Inconclusive results from trophectoderm biopsy do not predict definitive results following re-biopsy. Fertility and Sterility. 102(3). e77–e78. 1 indexed citations
12.
Barritt, J., Martha Luna, B. Sandler, M. Duke, & Alan B. Copperman. (2012). Elective oocyte freezing for the preservation of fertility. Open Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2(1). 27–33.
13.
Luna, Martha, Catherine A. Bigelow, M. Duke, et al.. (2011). Should ICSI be recommended routinely in patients with four or fewer oocytes retrieved?. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics. 28(10). 911–915. 42 indexed citations
14.
Luna, Martha, Alan B. Copperman, M. Duke, et al.. (2007). Human blastocyst morphological quality is significantly improved in embryos classified as fast on day 3 (≥10 cells), bringing into question current embryological dogma. Fertility and Sterility. 89(2). 358–363. 48 indexed citations
15.
Schiff, Jonathan D., Martha Luna, J. Barritt, et al.. (2007). The morphology of extracted testicular sperm correlates with fertilization but not pregnancy rates. British Journal of Urology. 100(6). 1326–1329. 2 indexed citations
16.
Luna, Martha, M. Duke, Alan B. Copperman, et al.. (2006). Blastocyst embryo transfer is associated with a sex-ratio imbalance in favor of male offspring. Fertility and Sterility. 87(3). 519–523. 70 indexed citations
17.
Barritt, J., Martha Luna, M. Duke, et al.. (2006). Report of four donor-recipient oocyte cryopreservation cycles resulting in high pregnancy and implantation rates. Fertility and Sterility. 87(1). 189.e13–189.e17. 38 indexed citations
18.
Schiff, Jonathan D., Natan Bar‐Chama, Martha Luna, M. Duke, & J. Barritt. (2006). 1414: Day of Insemination Motile Sperm Count, Kruger Score and IVF Outcomes. The Journal of Urology. 175(4S). 456–456.
19.
Grunfeld, L., et al.. (2005). Challenging Traditional Dogma: A Report of Two Cases of Late Monozygotic Splitting Resulting in Dichorionic Twinning. Fertility and Sterility. 84. S238–S239. 3 indexed citations
20.
Barritt, J., et al.. (2005). Monochorionic Twin Pregnancies: An Analysis of Potential Correlations With Stimulation Protocols and Embryology Laboratory Techniques. Fertility and Sterility. 84. S104–S105. 1 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 Thamara Viloria Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Martha Luna Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Sonia Brahem Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Pilar Gámiz Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Masayuki Kinutani Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Hiromitsu Hattori Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Koichi Kyono Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Selwyn P. Oskowitz Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Brandon Bankowski Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Leyre Herrero
Rankless by CCL
2026