Sperm DNA Fragmentation: causes, evaluation and management in male infertility
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Male infertility is a great matter of concern as out of 15% of infertile couples in the reproductive age, about 40% are contributed by male factors alone. For DNA condensation during spermatogenesis, constrained DNA nicking is required, which if increased beyond certain level results in infertility in men. High sperm DNA Fragmentation (SDF) majorly contributes to male infertility and its association with regards to poor natural conception and assisted reproductive technology (ART) outcomes is equivocal. Apoptosis, protamination failure and the excess of reactive oxygen species (ROS) are considered to be the main causes of SDF. It's testing came into existence because of the limitations of the conventional methods in explaining infertility in normozoospermic infertile individuals. Over the past 25 years, SDF's several testing strategies have been proposed to diagnose the aetiology of infertility. Various treatments combined with sperm selection techniques are being used alone or in combination to reduce DNA fragmentation index (DFI) and obtain spermatozoa with high quality chromatin for assisted reproduction. This review summarises SDF's main causes, its impact on fertility and clinical outcomes in assisted reproduction, the need to perform test, testing procedures, and the treatment strategies.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".