MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404832157 · doi:10.1097/mou.0000000000001252

The changing landscape of nonobstructive azoospermia

2024· review· en· W4404832157 on OpenAlexaff
Laurianne Rita Garabed, Ryan Flannigan

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Urology · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSperm and Testicular Function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAzoospermiaSperm RetrievalMedicineSpermSomatic cellIdentification (biology)Obstructive azoospermiaEpigeneticsComputational biologyBioinformaticsBiologyInfertilityEcologyAndrologyGeneticsPregnancyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This article aims to describe new developments in the field of nonobstructive azoospermia biology, diagnostics, biomarkers, and therapeutic strategies. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent studies have investigated the molecular underpinnings of cellular dysfunction that is contributing to spermatogenic dysfunction and findings suggest abnormalities across both somatic and germ cells. Biomarkers to predict the chances of sperm retrieval are being explored utilizing cell free (cf) DNA and RNA from various body fluids, in addition to a full range of transcripts and epigenetics within seminal fluid. Various approaches are being explored to optimize sperm identification from surgical specimens including microfluidic and machine learning approaches. Finally, approaches to regenerating sperm production from males with nonobstructive azoospermia are evolving to include various 3-dimensional culture techniques with integration of computational modeling. SUMMARY: The landscape of nonobstructive azoospermia biomarkers, molecular underpinnings, technological approaches to more reliably identify sperm and novel regenerative therapeutic strategies are likely to transform the field of male reproduction in years to come.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.991
Threshold uncertainty score0.528

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.316 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in UrologySame topicSperm and Testicular FunctionFrench-language works237,207