Combined aerobic and resistance exercise training for improving reproductive function in infertile men: a randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This randomized controlled trial was conducted to examine the effects of 24 weeks of combined aerobic and resistance exercise training on seminal markers of inflammation and oxidative stress as well as markers of male reproductive function and reproductive performance in infertile patients. Of a total of 1296 infertile patients (aged 25-40 years) who were screened, 556 were randomly assigned to exercise (n = 278) and nonexercise (n = 278) groups. Semen samples were taken before and at 12 and 24 weeks as well as 7 and 30 days post-intervention. The training program reduced seminal proinflammatory cytokines (interleukin (IL)-1β, IL-6, IL-8, and tumor necrosis factor alpha) and markers of oxidative stress (reactive oxygen species, malondialdehyde, and 8-isoprostane) (P < 0.05). Additional improvements were also achieved in seminal antioxidant defense system (superoxide dismutase, catalase, and total antioxidant capacity) (P < 0.05). Training-induced changes in inflammation and oxidative stress status correlated with favorable improvements in semen parameters, sperm DNA integrity, and pregnancy rate (P < 0.05). In conclusion, these results support the evidence for the favorable effects of combined aerobic and resistance exercise training in male factor infertility.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".