Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24357628›Full record

GuidelineAndrology2014

EAA/EMQN best practice guidelines for molecular diagnosis of Y-chromosomal microdeletions: state-of-the-art 2013.

C Krausz, L Hoefsloot, M Simoni, F Tüttelmann, European Academy of Andrology, European Molecular Genetics Quality Network

Abstract readPractice GuidelineReview
In one paragraph

Guideline in Andrology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 171 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
171citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

171 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Clinical and Pathological Characteristics of Men with Infertility at a Single Center: A Retrospective Descriptive Study.Medical principles and practice : international journal of the Kuwait University, Health Science Centre · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

111 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

6 authors.

C KrauszAndrology Unit, Department of Experimental and Clinical Biomedical Sciences, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
L Hoefsloot
M Simoni
F Tüttelmann
European Academy of Andrology
European Molecular Genetics Quality Network

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The molecular diagnosis of Y-chromosomal microdeletions is a common routine genetic test which is part of the diagnostic workup of azoospermic and severe oligozoospermic men. Since 1999, the European Academy of Andrology (EAA) and the European Molecular Genetics Quality Network (EMQN) have been actively involved in supporting the improvement of the quality of the diagnostic assays by publication of the laboratory guidelines for molecular diagnosis of Y-chromosomal microdeletions and by offering external quality assessment trials. The present revision of the 2004 laboratory guidelines summarizes all the clinical novelties related to the Y chromosome (classic, partial and gene-specific deletions, genotype-phenotype correlations, methodological issues) and provides an update on the results of the quality control programme. These aspects also reflect the consensus of a large group of specialists present at a round table session during the recent Florence-Utah-Symposium on 'Genetics of male infertility' (Florence, 19-21 September, 2013). During the last 10 years the gr/gr deletion has been demonstrated as a significant risk factor for impaired sperm production. However, the screening for this deletion type in the routine diagnostic setting is still a debated issue among experts. The original basic protocol based on two multiplex polymerase chain reactions remains fully valid and appropriate for accurate diagnosis of complete AZF deletions and it requires only a minor modification in populations with a specific Y chromosome background. However, in light of novel data on genotype-phenotype correlations, the extension analysis for the AZFa and AZFb deletions is now routinely recommended. Novel methods and kits with excessively high number of markers do not improve the sensitivity of the test, may even complicate the interpretation of the results and are not recommended. Annual participation in an external quality control programme is strongly encouraged. The 12-year experience with the EMQN/EAA scheme has shown a steep decline in diagnostic (genotyping) error rate and a simultaneous improvement on reporting practice.

Indexed as

Genotyping TechniquesInfertility, MaleMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesSex Chromosome Disorders of Sex DevelopmentAzoospermiaChromosome DeletionChromosomes, Human, YGenetic CounselingGenetic TestingGenotypeHumansMaleOligospermiaSex Chromosome AberrationsAZFazoospermiageneticsgr/gr deletionmale infertilityoligozoospermiaquality controlspermatogenesisY chromosome microdeletion

Identifiers

PMID24357628
PMCPMC4065365

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.