Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21941182›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in urology2011

Male reproductive health and prostate cancer risk.

Thomas J Walsh

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in urology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Male infertility.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2023
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Human Chromosome Y and Haplogroups; introducing YDHS Database.Clinical and translational medicine · 2015
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Male reproductive cancers and infertility: a mutual relationship.International journal of molecular sciences · 2015
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Thomas J WalshDepartment of Urology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington, USA. walsht@uw.edu

Funding

NCI NIH HHS L30 CA130147
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewMale infertility impacts a substantial proportion of men and has serious implication for a man's quality of life. Advances in reproductive technology may allow men to bypass urologic care in order to achieve their family planning goals. Recent data suggests that male reproductive failure may be a harbinger of future urologic diseases, including prostate cancer (CaP), thus emphasizing the importance of dedicated urologic evaluation and care for all male infertility patients. RECENT

findingsWe will review the epidemiologic data that explores an association between male reproductive health and CaP. We will review the potential biologic mechanisms that may underlie this association, and explore possible reasons for inconsistencies in study findings. SUMMARY: Studies of the association between male infertility and CaP are inconsistent. Despite this, the association between reproductive health in a man's fourth decade (30s) and his development of aggressive CaP in his sixth decade (50s) should not be ignored. These findings, combined with the robustness of the potential common underlying mechanisms, provide a foundation for future studies of male reproductive health that are more specific in their approach to answering questions about the association between male reproductive failure and future systemic disease.

Indexed as

Men's HealthReproductionReproductive HealthAdultAgedAge FactorsAgingHumansInfertility, MaleMaleMiddle AgedProstatic NeoplasmsRisk AssessmentRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID21941182
PMCPMC3321353

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.