ArticleInvestigative and clinical urology2021
Accuracy comparison study of new smartphone-based semen analyzer versus laboratory sperm quality analyzer.
Article in Investigative and clinical urology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic accuracy of smartphone technology for capturing videos and images of semen analysis samples: A cross-sectional study.Arab journal of urology · 2025Article
- The Motility Ratio method as a novel approach to qualify semen assessment.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- The prediction of semen quality based on lifestyle behaviours by the machine learning based models.Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E · 2024Article
- Introducing a New Smartphone Applied Semen Analyzer, SpermCell™: A Cross-Sectional Validation Study with a Comparative Analysis and a Mini Patient Questionnaire on a Large Sample Cohort.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Article
- Sperm Gone Smart: A Portable Device (iSpermAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to test the clinical efficacy of a portable smartphone-based App assisted semen analysis (SA) system, O'VIEW-M PRO® to clinically accurate in comparison with results of laboratory-based conventional semen analyses including manual microscopic and computer-assisted semen analysis (CASA) for self-evaluation of seminal parameters. MATERIALS AND
methodsFrom January to May 2021, a total of 39 semen samples were analyzed for the sperm concentration and motility with new smartphone-based App assisted semen analyzer, O'VIEW-M PRO®, and results compared with those from laboratory-based manual microscopic SA with Makler Counting Chamber and CASA.
resultsThe coefficient factors among the results of the measurement with Makler chamber and laboratory-based CASA comparing to O'VIEW-M PRO® were 0.666 and 0.655 for sperm density, 0.662 and 0.658 for sperm motility, respectively. There were no particular problems with clinical use of the O'VIEW-M PRO®. Device performance in classifying samples is positive (<15×10
conclusionsThis study shows a novel smartphone-based App assisted SA system. O'VIEW-M PRO® can easily obtain semen parameter information through self-diagnosis at home and induce infertile men's treatment and help patients after receiving infertile men's treatment before receiving treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.