MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205948764 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-053051

Impacts of COVID-19 and SARS-CoV-2 on male reproductive function: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

2022· review· en· W4205948764 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Xinyun Li, Hua Lu, Fangyuan Li, Qi Zhang, Tong Wang, Lingxia Qiang, Qian Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 Impact on Reproduction
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Science and Technology of the People's Republic of China
KeywordsMedicineObservational studyMeta-analysisCochrane LibraryMEDLINEReproductive medicineSystematic reviewGynecologyBioinformaticsInternal medicineBiologyPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2 has become a global health challenge. SARS-CoV-2 can infect host cells via the ACE2 receptor, which is widely expressed in the corpus cavernosum, testis and male reproductive tract, and participates in erection, spermatogenesis and androgen metabolism. Also, the immune response and persistent fever resulting from COVID-19 may lead to damage of the testicular activity, consequently compromising male fertility. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, China Science and Technology Journal database, Chinese Biomedical Databases and Wanfang Data will be systematically searched for observational studies (case-control and cohort) published up to March 2021 in English or in Chinese literature on the impacts of COVID-19 and SARS-CoV-2 on male reproductive function. This protocol will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols guidelines and Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology. The primary outcome will be semen parameters, and the additional outcomes will include: (a) detection of SARS-COV-2 in semen, (b) male sexual hormones, (c) sperm DNA fragmentation index, (d) erectile function, (e) evaluation of testis and also the male genital tract. Two reviewers will independently extract data from the included studies based on a predesigned data extraction form. The risk of bias of included studies will be evaluated through the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies. Review Manager software V.5.3 will be used for statistical analysis. Q statistic and I² test will be performed to assess the heterogeneity among studies. Sensitivity analysis will be used to explore the robustness of pooled effects. We will use the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system to assess the quality of evidence. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required and results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021245161.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.884
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.452
GPT teacher head0.561
Teacher spread0.108 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicCOVID-19 Impact on ReproductionFrench-language works237,207