Insulin dependant diabetes mellitus: implications for male reproductive function
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Diabetes mellitus (DM) is increasing in men of reproductive age. Despite this, the prevalence of diabetes in men attending fertility clinics is largely unknown. Furthermore, studies examining the effects of DM on sperm fertility potential have been limited to conventional semen analysis. METHODS: Conventional semen analysis (semen volume, sperm count, motility and morphology) was performed for 27 diabetic (mean age 34+/-2 years) and 29 non-diabetic subjects (control group, men undergoing routine infertility investigations, mean age 33+/-1 years). Nuclear DNA (nDNA) fragmentation was assessed using the alkaline Comet assay and mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) deletions by Long-PCR. RESULTS: Other than a small, but significant, reduction in semen volume in diabetic men (2.6 versus 3.3 ml; P<0.05), conventional semen parameters did not differ significantly from control subjects. Diabetic subjects had significantly higher mean nDNA fragmentation (53 versus 32%; P<0.0001) and median number of mtDNA deletions (4 versus 3; P<0.05) compared with control subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes is associated with increased sperm nuclear and mtDNA damage that may impair the reproductive capability of these men.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".