Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31203470›Full record

ReviewCurrent urology reports2019

Sperm Morphology: History, Challenges, and Impact on Natural and Assisted Fertility.

Rachel B Danis, Mary K Samplaski

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current urology reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

38 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Semen Characteristics and Embryo Outcomes in IVF.Journal of family & reproductive health · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Assessment of Boar Semen Morphology and Morphometry.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2025
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

2 authors.

Rachel B DanisDivision of Reproductive Endocrinology, University of Southern California, 2020 Zonal Avenue, IRD 534, Los Angeles, CA, 90033, USA. Rachel.danis@med.usc.edu.
Mary K SamplaskiInstitute of Urology, University of Southern California, 1441 Eastlake Avenue, Suite 7416, Los Angeles, CA, 90089, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewThe classification of morphologically normal sperm has been progressively redefined. Concurrently, our understanding of the significance of sperm morphology in relation to male factor infertility has evolved. In this review, we will discuss the evolution of sperm morphology assessment and factors that contribute to its measurement variability. We will examine the impact of sperm morphology on natural pregnancy, IUI, IVF, and ICSI outcomes. RECENT

findingsThere is a lack of consensus on sperm morphology classification, technique, and inter-observer grading variability. Current evidence suggests sperm morphology has low predictive value for pregnancy success, for both natural and assisted reproduction. Additionally, the threshold for what is considered an adequate percentage of morphologically normal sperm has changed over time. These variables have called into question the relevance of this variable in predicting fertility outcomes. Our understanding of the impact of sperm morphology on reproductive outcomes continues to evolve and seems to play less of a role than initially thought.

Indexed as

Reproductive Techniques, AssistedCell CountFemaleFertilityHumansInfertility, MaleMalePregnancyPregnancy OutcomePrognosisReproductionSemen AnalysisSpermatozoaAssisted reproductive technologyInfertilityMale factorSemen analysisSperm morphologyTeratozoospermia

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.