Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram
Telegram profile photo for АПАГ | Гинекология с Душой

Channel

АПАГ | Гинекология с Душой

@apog_official

On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Stars · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry

2,077subscribers

-10 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026

Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 1,000–3,162.

Register entry

Telegram ID-1002883937734
TypeChannel
Username@apog_official
CreatedBetween 1 June 2025 and 31 August 2025— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated.
First recorded7 August 2026
Last confirmed live17 August 2026
Measurements held6
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 17 August 2026
On Telegramt.me/apog_official

Growth

2,0762,0872,081.57 August 2026 — 2,087 subscribers7 August 2026 — 2,087 subscribers8 August 2026 — 2,085 subscribers11 August 2026 — 2,084 subscribers14 August 2026 — 2,076 subscribers17 August 2026 — 2,077 subscribers2,0777 August 202617 August 2026
6 measurements spanning 10 days, net -10. Dots are measurements; the straight line between them is drawn to join them, not to claim we know the path taken in between — snapshots are recorded only when a count changes, so gaps mean “no change observed”, never “interpolated”. The vertical axis spans 2,074–2,089 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
17 Aug 2026, 17:352,077+1
14 Aug 2026, 18:162,076-8
11 Aug 2026, 02:532,084-1
8 Aug 2026, 01:312,085-2
7 Aug 2026, 12:012,087no change
7 Aug 2026, 11:482,087first reading

Engagement

20 posts held, back to 16 July 2026the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 2 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

ERR · 30 days
11.1%
avg views ÷ 2,077 subscribers
Avg views / post
231
19 posts measured
Reaction rate
10.4%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
19
of 20 held

ERR is average views per post over the last 30 days divided by subscribers, the definition TGStat uses, so this figure is comparable with the one you will see elsewhere. It falls structurally as a channel grows: a high ERR on a small channel and a low one on a large channel describe reach mathematics, not quality. We publish the figure and the sample it came from and pass no verdict on it.

ER is defined industry-wide as (forwards + reactions + comments) ÷ views— note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegram’s public web preview carries views and reactions but not forward or comment counts, so the reaction rate above is the reactions term only and is therefore a floor: the true ER for this channel is higher by an amount we have not measured and will not estimate.

What these figures were computed from
WindowRolling 30 days · latest post in window 7 August 2026
Posts held20 (16 July 20267 August 2026)
Views total4,383
Reactions total454
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken7 Aug 2026, 18:05 UTC

Views are a single reading per post, taken at the time above. A post published in the last day or two is still accumulating views, which pulls the 30-day average down slightly. That is a property of the standard definition rather than a fault in it, so we keep the definition rather than “correcting” the number into something nobody can reproduce.

Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form — 8.12K, 3.7M — so any reading at or above 1,000 reaches us rounded to three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. Averages and rates derived from them are shown to the same precision rather than to the unit: a figure like 3,701,250 would assert digits nobody measured.

Reaction counts are published per emoji and rounded the same way, so a total below 1,000 is exact and a larger one is a sum that may carry a rounded component from each emoji above 1,000. Because it is a sum, it does not look rounded — read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.

What this channel posts

Video runtime
38s
Average length
38s

Measured directly from 1 video with a duration reading, out of the posts we hold for this channel — not this channel’s whole posting history, only the sample this register has actually read. An exact reading to the second, taken from the post itself rather than from Telegram’s own rounded chrome, so it carries no mark.

Reaction mix

459 reactions across 20 posts, in 7 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 32.7% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
💯15032.7%
👍14331.2%
🔥11625.3%
custom 5276358088956344409439.37%
40.871%
custom 525798795548559700720.436%
10.218%

Custom emoji. 2 of the rows above are Telegram custom emoji, which the public preview renders as an element carrying only a numeric id — no character, and no image we can reach. The id is printed as-is rather than substituted with a look-alike glyph, because a stand-in would be our invention showing where a measurement should be. The counts beside them areTelegram’s.

No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.

Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.

Coverage. Reactions were read on 20 of the 20 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 459reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 20 most recent posts we hold, published 16 July 2026 to 7 August 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.

Telegram Stars

Stars received
5
across the posts below
Posts paid on
1
of 20 we hold a reading for · 5%
Most on one post
5
single highest reading

A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @apog_official. Telegram publishes the count on the public post preview alongside ordinary reactions, and this register reads it there. It is the only figure on this site that measures money moving rather than attention.

Stars are not reactions, and the two are never added. They are rendered in the same strip on Telegram and counted in the same shape, but one is a tap and the other is a purchase. The reaction totals and the engagement rate elsewhere on this page exclude every figure in this section, and no rate here is computed against a reaction count.

This is not revenue, and we publish no currency figure. What a Star costs a reader and what it pays a channel are different numbers, Telegram takes a share we cannot observe, and the terms have changed. Converting a Star count into money would be an estimate dressed as a measurement, so the count is where we stop.

Counted over the 20 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 16 July 2026 to 7 August 2026. Star counts above 1,000 reach us in Telegram’s short form and carry the same three-significant-figure rounding as everything else on this page.

Recent posts

7 Aug 2026, 11:20 UTC107 views25 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Photo

Беременность и еда: норма и РПП «ЭКСПЕРТНЫЙ РАЗБОР» Белоусова Алиса Сергеевна — клинический и перинатальный психолог, специалист по расстройствам пищевого поведения (РПП). Сертифицированный член АПАГ (ISPOG), специалист ассоциации РПП. Главные ошибки — либо «есть за двоих», либо, наоборот, «держать себя в ежовых рукавицах», чтобы не испортить фигуру. Здоровое пищевое поведение в беременность ▪️ Гибкость и интуит

👍13💯73custom 52763580889563444092

7 Aug 2026, 07:15 UTC121 views22 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Photo

Когда медицина слышит: персонализация и душевное здоровье в программах ВРТ Одним из ключевых критериев клинического качества в современных ВРТ является не только показатель живорождений, но и степень сохранения субъектности, автономии и душевного здоровья пациента. 💬 Каждый обратившийся в клинику приходит со своей биографией, историей утрат и побед, уникальным пониманием того, что для него значит “успех”. Стандарт

💯8👍7🔥6custom 52763580889563444091

6 Aug 2026, 07:15 UTC147 views23 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Photo

Свобода выбора и иллюзии успеха В идее вовлечённости и расширения информированности пациентов — ключ не только к безопасности, но и к взрослению терапевтических отношений. Однако, несмотря на растущее число инструментов поддержки (буклеты, подробные консультации, групповые обсуждения), даже “подкованные” пациенты нередко удерживают нереалистичные надежды на успех ЭКО — как правило, переоценивая шансы на живорождени

👍14🔥6💯2custom 52763580889563444091

5 Aug 2026, 07:15 UTC153 views22 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Photo

Эмоциональные потери при прекращении ВРТ: слепая зона клинического внимания Физические и психологические последствия процедур ВРТ неизбежно влияют на решения пациентов относительно продолжения или прекращения лечения. 💬 Момент принятия решения о завершении попыток зачастую становится моментом глубокой утраты — кризиса идентичности и значимой экзистенциальной боли. В отличие от горя после традиционно признанной поте

💯11🔥7👍3custom 52763580889563444091

4 Aug 2026, 07:15 UTC170 views20 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Photo

ЭКО: путь к реальной эффективной практике Рандомизированные исследования показывают: внедрение экспертно структурированных, нейтральных и доступных информационных ресурсов по дополнительным методам ЭКО помогает паре не только глубже понять все нюансы вмешательства, но и принимать по-настоящему осознанные решения о дальнейшем лечении. Это преображает саму структуру коммуникации “врач–пациент” и повышает психологическ

👍7💯6🔥6custom 52763580889563444091

3 Aug 2026, 07:15 UTC187 views21 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Photo

Стратегии взаимодействия и повышение автономии пациента в ЭКО Рандомизированные исследования показывают: внедрение экспертно структурированных, нейтральных и доступных информационных ресурсов по дополнительным методам ЭКО помогает паре не только глубже понять все нюансы вмешательства, но и принимать по-настоящему осознанные решения о дальнейшем лечении. Это преображает саму структуру коммуникации “врач–пациент” и по

💯7🔥7👍6custom 52763580889563444091

1 Aug 2026, 11:35 UTC393 views56 reactions5 Starsread 7 August 2026
Photo

Сегодня АПАГ — ровно год! Год назад мы решили: женское здоровье не может быть разделено на «гинекологию» и «психологию». Мы стали первым в России профессиональным сообществом, где врачи и психологи говорят на одном языке — языке целостного взгляда на женщину. Мы стали 18-й страной в международном движении ISPOG. Мы провели первую конференцию, которая собрала 100 городов России. С осени мы начинаем запуск образовате

👍21custom 527635808895634440916💯13🔥6

31 Jul 2026, 07:15 UTC222 views23 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Photo

Этика и психология совместных решений в ВРТ Современные клинические стандарты предъявляют принципиально новые требования к этике информирования и работе с ожиданиями пациентов. Только 52% пациентов получают информацию о реальной эффективности дополнительных методов ЭКО, и лишь треть — о потенциальных рисках, хотя именно такие сведения лежат в основе принципа “информированного согласия”. ✍️ Недостаточное освещение

💯11👍6🔥5custom 52579879554855970071

30 Jul 2026, 11:45 UTC210 views30 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Video

29 июля, прошел второй вебинар ISPOG с участием доктора Нурит Глейзер Шодик на тему «Я тоже потерял ребенка»: опыт мужчин после рождения мертвого ребенка. Было много полезной и ценной информации. Следите за анонсами, присоединяйтесь к АПАГ и участвуйте в профессиональных вебинарах вместе с нами! ❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️ 🧠 АПАГ | Гинекология с душой

🔥12💯10👍6custom 52763580889563444092

30 Jul 2026, 07:15 UTC210 views19 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Photo

«Дополнительные» методы лечения при ЭКО Распространение дополнительных методов лечения (“add-on”) при экстракорпоральном оплодотворении становится одной из самых острых и поляризующих проблем современной репродуктивной медицины. Несмотря на отсутствие достаточной доказательной базы для большинства “дополнительных” интервенций, их популярность уверенно растёт как среди пациентов, так и среди специалистов. Согласно

👍7💯6🔥5custom 52763580889563444091

29 Jul 2026, 07:15 UTC201 views25 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Photo

Задачи для команды репродуктивной медицины В современном подходе к бесплодию одно из ведущих мест занимает междисциплинарность: акушер-гинеколог, репродуктолог, психолог, психотерапевт, нередко — сексолог и специалист по семейным коммуникациям работают как единая команда. Цель — видеть за протоколом лечения человека со страхами, надеждами, личными смыслами. Непростые решения — продолжать ли попытки после неудач, р

👍11🔥7💯6custom 52763580889563444091

28 Jul 2026, 07:15 UTC215 views24 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Photo

Пациентоориентированность и вовлечённость: новые стандарты сопровождения в ВРТ Массовое внедрение ВРТ и пронаталистские инициативы повышают ожидания от врачебной деятельности, нередко превращая диагноз и лечение в «проект с чёткой целью». При этом важно помнить, что информированность пары и её участие в принятии решений по поводу лечения играет решающую роль: чем больше пациенты вовлечены, тем меньше их тревога и в

💯16🔥61custom 52763580889563444091

Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @apog_official. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.

Stars beside a post are paid reactions — Telegram Stars, bought with money and spent on that post. They are a different unit from reactions and are never added to them, here or anywhere else on this page.

Citation-graph rank

Citation-graph rank — 223,985 of 1,480,975entries in the measured graph. A weighted position computed from the forward and mention edges below — republished posts weigh more than named mentions — and recomputed periodically, over the whole graph. Published only as this ordinal position, never as a score: a position is a fact, and a score printed beside one channel’s name would read as a verdict this register does not make. The two counts beneath stay separate for the same reason mentions are never summed with forwards anywhere else on this page — a named-by count costs nothing to manufacture. The top 100 by this measure, or how it is computed.

Forward network

Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.

Mentions

Named by 2 registered channels — every channel on the register whose own posts have named this one, by its current username or any other username it currently holds, merged from two separately captured readings of the same fact so a namer caught by only one of them is not missed and a namer both caught is not counted twice. A username this channel has since dropped is not matched — that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting today’s namer to yesterday’s owner would misattribute it.

A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.

Cite this entry

A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 17 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.

“АПАГ | Гинекология с Душой” (@apog_official), 2,077 subscribers as measured 17 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/apog_official.

Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.