Effects of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines on Sperm Quality: Systematic Review (Preprint)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
<sec> <title>BACKGROUND</title> The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by SARS-CoV-2, has triggered a global public health crisis of unprecedented proportions. SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is a highly effective strategy for preventing infections and severe COVID-19 outcomes. Although several studies have concluded that COVID-19 vaccines are unlikely to affect fertility, concerns have arisen regarding adverse events, including the potential impact on fertility; these concerns are plagued by limited and inconsistent evidence. </sec> <sec> <title>OBJECTIVE</title> This review aims to provide a recent assessment of the literature on the impact of COVID-19 vaccines on male sperm quality. The possible impact of COVID-19 vaccines on fertility potential was also examined to draw a clearer picture and to evaluate the effects of COVID-19 on male reproductive health. </sec> <sec> <title>METHODS</title> PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched from their inception to October 2023. Eligible studies included articles reporting SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and human semen quality and fertility, as well as the impact of vaccination on assisted reproductive technology treatment outcomes. The quality of cohort studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and the quality of cross-sectional studies was assessed using the quality evaluation criteria recommended by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The systematic review followed PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. </sec> <sec> <title>RESULTS</title> The initial literature search yielded 4691 records by searching 5 peer-reviewed databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane). Finally, 24 relevant studies were selected for our study. There were evident research inequalities at the regional level, with the United States and Western European countries contributing 38% (9/24) of the studies, Middle Eastern countries contributing 38% (9/24), China accounting for 21% (5/24), and Africa and South America accounting for none. Nonetheless, the overall quality of the included studies was generally good. Our results demonstrated that serious side effects of the COVID-19 vaccine are extremely rare, and men experience few problems with sperm parameters or reproductive potential after vaccination. </sec> <sec> <title>CONCLUSIONS</title> On the basis of the studies published so far, the COVID-19 vaccine is safe for male reproductive health. Obviously, vaccination is a wise option rather than experience serious adverse symptoms of viral infections. These instances of evidence may help reduce vaccine hesitancy and increase vaccination coverage, particularly among reproductive-age couples. As new controlled trials and prospective cohort studies with larger sample sizes emerge, the possibility of a negative effect of the COVID-19 vaccine on sperm quality must be further clarified. </sec>
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,020 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».