SynthesisInternational urology and nephrology2015
A systematic review of recent clinical practice guidelines and best practice statements for the evaluation of the infertile male.
Synthesis in International urology and nephrology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
33 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Zinc levels in seminal plasma and their correlation with male infertility: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2016Pooled it
- A systematic review of clinical practice guidelines and best practice statements for the diagnosis and management of varicocele in children and adolescents.Asian journal of andrologyPooled it
- Outcome of varicocele repair in men with nonobstructive azoospermia: systematic review and meta-analysis.Asian journal of andrologyPooled it
- Guilu erxian glue improves sperm quality in oligasthenospermia mice by promoting TDRP methylation and regulating the cAMP/PKA pathway.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Fertility Rate and Sperm DNA Fragmentation Index following Varicocelectomy in Primary Infertile Men with Clinical Varicocele: A Prospective Longitudinal Study.International journal of fertility & sterility · 2024Article
- Filling the Gaps in Oncofertility Care by Addressing Challenges Faced by Patients and Providers.Cureus · 2023Review
- Seminal biomarkers and their correlations to semen parameters in subfertile men.European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X · 2023Article
- Management of male factor infertility: position statement from the Italian Society of Andrology and Sexual Medicine (SIAMS) : Endorsing Organization: Italian Society of Embryology, Reproduction, and Research (SIERR).Journal of endocrinological investigation · 2022Article
- Exome sequencing reveals variants in known and novel candidate genes for severe sperm motility disorders.Human reproduction (Oxford, England) · 2021Article
- Loss of CEP70 function affects acrosome biogenesis and flagella formation during spermiogenesis.Cell death & disease · 2021Article
- Sperm DNA fragmentation testing: Summary evidence and clinical practice recommendations.Andrologia · 2021Review
- Impact of Moriamin Forte on Testicular and Epididymal Damage in Rats with Oligoasthenospermia.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2021Article
- Infertility: Practical Clinical Issues for Routine Investigation of the Male Partner.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
- Oncofertility in adult and pediatric populations: options and barriers.Translational andrology and urology · 2020Review
- Semen quality pattern and age threshold: a retrospective cross-sectional study of 71,623 infertile men in China, between 2011 and 2017.Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E · 2019Article
- Evaluation of the Standardization in Semen Analysis Performance According to the WHO Protocols Among Laboratories in Tehran, Iran.Iranian journal of pathology · 2019Article
- Effect of varicocele repair on sperm DNA fragmentation: a review.International urology and nephrology · 2018Review
- Proteomic profile of human spermatozoa in healthy and asthenozoospermic individuals.Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E · 2018Review
- Sperm DNA fragmentation testing as a diagnostic and prognostic parameter of couple infertility.Translational andrology and urology · 2017Article
- Unraveling the utility and limitations of clinical practice guidelines.Translational andrology and urology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe systematically identified and reviewed the methods and consistency of recommendations of recently developed clinical practice guidelines (CPG) and best practice statements (BPS) on the evaluation of the infertile male.
methodsMEDLINE and related engines as well as guidelines' Web sites were searched for CPG and BPS written in English on the general evaluation of male infertility published between January 2008 and April 2015.
resultsFour guidelines were identified, all of which reported to have been recently updated. Systematic review was not consistently used in the BPS despite being reported in the CPG. Only one of them reported having a patient representative in its development team. The CPG issued by the European Association of Urology (EAU) graded some recommendations and related that to levels (but not quality) of evidence. Overall, the BPS issued respectively by the American Urological Association and American Society for Reproductive Medicine concurred with each other, but both differed from the EAU guidelines with regard to methods of collection, extraction and interpretation of data. None of the guidelines incorporated health economics. Important specific limitations of conventional semen analysis results were ignored by all guidelines. Besides variation in the methodological quality, implementation strategies were not reported in two out of four guidelines.
conclusionsWhile the various panels of experts who contributed to the development of the CPG and BPS reviewed should be commended on their tremendous efforts aiming to establish a clinical standard in both the evaluation and management of male infertility, we recognized inconsistencies in the methodology of their synthesis and in the contents of their final recommendations. These discrepancies pose a barrier in the general implementation of these guidelines and may limit their utility in standardizing clinical practice or improving health-related outcomes. Continuous efforts are needed to generate high-quality evidence to allow further development of these important guidelines for the evaluation and management of males suffering from infertility.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26238943What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.