Male personal heat exposures and fecundability: A preconception cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Several studies indicate adverse effects of selected heat exposures on semen quality, but few studies have directly evaluated fertility as an endpoint. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated prospectively the association between male heat exposures and fecundability, the per-cycle probability of conception. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed data from 3041 couples residing in the United States or Canada who enrolled in a prospective preconception cohort study (2013-2021). At enrollment, males reported on several heat-related exposures, such as use of saunas, hot baths, seat heaters, and tight-fitting underwear. Pregnancy status was updated on female follow-up questionnaires every 8 weeks until conception or a censoring event (initiation of fertility treatment, cessation of pregnancy attempts, withdrawal, loss to follow-up, or 12 cycles), whichever came first. We used proportional probabilities regression models to estimate fecundability ratios (FR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the association between heat exposures and fecundability, mutually adjusting for heat exposures and other potential confounders. RESULTS: We observed small inverse associations for hot bath/tub use (≥3 vs. 0 times/month: FR = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.70-1.07) and fever in the 3 months before baseline (FR = 0.94, 95% CI: 0.79-1.12; one cycle of follow-up: FR = 0.84, 95% CI: 0.64-1.11). Little association was found for sauna use, hours of laptop use on one's lap, seat heater use, time spent sitting, and use of tight-fitting underwear. Based on a cumulative heat metric, FRs for 1, 2, 3, and ≥4 versus 0 heat exposures were 0.99 (95% CI: 0.87-1.12), 1.03 (95% CI: 0.89-1.19), 0.94 (95% CI: 0.74-1.19), and 0.77 (95% CI: 0.50-1.17), respectively. Associations were stronger among men aged ≥30 years (≥4 vs. 0 heat exposures: FR = 0.60, 95% CI: 0.34-1.04). CONCLUSION: Male use of hot tubs/baths and fever showed weak inverse associations with fecundability. Cumulative exposure to multiple heat sources was associated with a moderate reduction in fecundability, particularly among males aged ≥30 years.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".