MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120688227 · doi:10.1093/humrep/deh885

Longitudinal study of sperm DNA fragmentation as measured by terminal uridine nick end-labelling assay

2005· article· en· W2120688227 on OpenAlexaff
Martin Sergerie, Guillaume Laforest, Kyle R. Boulanger, F. Bissonnette, G. Bleau

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Reproduction · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSperm and Testicular Function
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalHôpital Saint-LucSante Montreal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDNA fragmentationSpermTUNEL assaySemenTerminal deoxynucleotidyl transferaseAndrologyBiologyMale infertilitySemen analysisRepeatabilityInfertilityMedicineChemistryGeneticsApoptosisPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: One major limitation in the use of sperm DNA fragmentation as measured by the TdT (terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase)-mediated dUTP nick-end labelling (TUNEL) assay is the paucity of solid data on the stability of this parameter. METHODS: The objective of our study was to evaluate variations in the degree of sperm DNA fragmentation, as measured by the TUNEL assay, over a 6 month period. Five donors provided semen samples (total 107) on the average three times per month, and 10 infertility patients provided semen samples every 4 weeks (total 58). RESULTS: The mean percentage of sperm DNA fragmentation for donors was 13.18%, the within-donor standard deviation (SD(W) = 3.79%) was small compared to between-donor (SD(B) = 17.56%). For the group of patients, the mean percentage of sperm DNA fragmentation was 22.44%, with SD(W) of 4.43% within patients and SD(B) of 29.48% between patients. No seasonal rhythm was observed during the study. The intra-class correlation coefficient for all subjects combined was 0.83. Compared to sperm concentration, individual coefficients of variation for sperm DNA fragmentation indicated less variability in four subjects, but were similar in the others. CONCLUSION: This longitudinal study shows that sperm DNA fragmentation is a parameter with good stability (repeatability) over time; it can be taken as a baseline both in healthy fertile men and in patients from infertility couples.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.266 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations63
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman ReproductionSame topicSperm and Testicular FunctionFrench-language works237,207