MétaCan
Menu
← all works

Are Tests of Sperm DNA Damage Clinically Useful? Pros and Cons

2009· review· en· 342 citations· W2052012348 on OpenAlex· 10.2164/jandrol.108.006908

Why is this work in the frame?

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

Canadian affiliationAn author listed a Canadian institution. This is the only route the usual frame has.

Full frame distilled prediction

Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

Candidate categories
none
Consensus categories
none
Domain
Candidate signal: noneConsensus signal: none
Study design
Candidate signal: Other designConsensus signal: none
Genre
Candidate signal: ReviewConsensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score
0.934
Threshold uncertainty score
0.525
Validation status
machine_predicted_unvalidated · codex-gemma-dda1882f352a

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Opus teacher head0.072
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread
0.305 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation status
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Abstract

The advent of assisted reproductive technologies, particularly intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), has revolutionized the treatment of male-factor infertility. However, there are many unanswered questions regarding the safety of these techniques. These safety concerns are relevant because 1) these technologies often bypass the barriers to natural selection; 2) infertile men, particularly those with severe male-factor infertility, possess substantially more sperm DNA damage than do fertile men; and 3) experimentally, sperm DNA damage has been shown to adversely affect the developing embryo. This review discusses the etiology of sperm DNA damage, describes the individual tests of sperm DNA damage, and explores the relationship between sperm DNA damage and pregnancy outcomes. Based on a systematic review of the literature, sperm DNA damage is associated with lower natural, intrauterine insemination (IUI), and in vitro fertilization (IVF) pregnancy rates, but not with ICSI pregnancy rates. The literature also suggests that that sperm DNA damage is associated with an increased risk of pregnancy loss in those couples undergoing IVF or ICSI. Nonetheless, the true clinical utility of sperm DNA damage tests remains to be established, because the available studies are small and few in number and the study characteristics are heterogeneous. Although current data suggest that impaired sperm DNA integrity may have the greatest effect on IUI pregnancy rates and pregnancy loss by IVF and ICSI, further prospective studies are needed before testing should become a routine part of patient management.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

The record

Venue
Journal of Andrology
Topic
Sperm and Testicular Function
Field
Medicine
Canadian institutions
McGill University
Funders
not available
Keywords
Intracytoplasmic sperm injectionSpermPregnancyAssisted reproductive technologyInfertilityDNA damageIn vitro fertilisationAndrologyMale infertilityReproductive technologyUnexplained infertilityInseminationMedicineGynecologyBiologyDNAGenetics
Has abstract in OpenAlex
yes