ANTIOXIDANT ACTIVITY OF SEMINAL PLASMA IN FERTILE AND INFERTILE MEN
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was conducted to evaluate and compare the total antioxidant capacity among fertile and infertile men. Thirty infertile patients and 20 fertility-proven healthy donors with normal sperm analysis were included in the study. Total antioxidant capacity, zinc and fructose levels of seminal plasma, and various sperm parameters were compared among fertile controls and idiopathic infertility patients prospectively. The mean antioxidant capacity of fertile controls (2.02 +/- 0.16 mmol/L) was significantly higher than that of the infertile patients group (1.78 +/- 0.23 mmol/L) (p < .01). Furthermore, asthenozoospermic and asthenoteratozoospermic groups had significantly lower mean antioxidant values (1.73 +/- 0.11 and 1.64 +/- 0.13, respectively) when compared to fertile control group (p < .01). The mean fructose level was significantly lower in the fertile control group and mean zinc level was significantly lower in the entire infertile group. On the other hand, antioxidant capacity is positively correlated to sperm motility (p = .001). Decreased antioxidant capacity was associated with impaired sperm function as a result of either increased ROS production or insufficient antioxidant capacity.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
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.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".