Adherence to american urological association (AUA) vasectomy guidelines: a systematic review of current practice among healthcare providers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vasectomy, a common male sterilization procedure, has seen a surge in popularity following the 2022 reversal of Roe v. Wade. The American Urological Association (AUA) vasectomy guidelines provide essential guidance for providers, outlining best practices for the procedure. We reviewed studies that examined adherence to the AUA vasectomy guidelines with regard to pre-procedure counseling, surgical technique, and post vasectomy semen analysis (PVSA) practice, as well as studies evaluating the impact of these guidelines on urology and non-urology practices. A total of five studies were identified that assessed adherence to the guidelines. Only one of these studies evaluated adherence to all three aspects of the guidelines. The remaining four studies focused solely on the practice of PVSA. Overall, urologists exhibited greater adherence to the guidelines compared to other healthcare providers. However, the adherence rates were still suboptimal. Five additional studies were included that evaluated the use of home-based PVSA, which is not part of the AUA guidelines. Conflicting results were found regarding the test compliance. While the studies evaluating home-based PVSA may raise the question of including this approach in the guidelines panel discussion, it is important to consider the potential benefits and drawbacks before incorporating it as an option in future guidelines.
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 | 0.013 | 0.062 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".