ArticleJAMA network open2024
Self-Rated Health and Semen Quality in Men Undergoing Assisted Reproductive Technology.
Article in JAMA network open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinicopathological andCurrent medicinal chemistry · 2025Article
- Geographic Disparities in Access to Assisted Reproductive Technology Centers in China: Spatial-Statistical Study.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2024Article
- Error in Author Affiliations.JAMA network open · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Numerous studies have documented the association of self-rated health (SRH) with chronic diseases. However, few studies have investigated its association with semen quality. Objective: To examine the association of SRH with semen quality among men undergoing assisted reproductive technology (ART) in China. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study recruited male partners in couples undergoing ART treatment at the Center for Reproductive Medicine, Tongji Hospital, Wuhan, China. A total of 1262 men underwent 2 semen examinations and completed a questionnaire on SRH between December 2018 and January 2020. Data analysis was performed from November 20, 2022, to March 24, 2023. Exposure: SRH, including overall physical and mental health, as well as reproductive-related physical and mental health specifically, were reported at baseline recruitment. Main Outcomes and Measures: Sperm concentration, sperm progressive motility, sperm motility, and sperm count as semen quality parameters. Results: The study included 1262 men with a mean (SD) age of 32.79 (5.25) years and body mass index of 24.37 (3.68). Men with poorer SRH had lower semen quality (eg, sperm concentration among poor vs very good overall physical health: percentage variation, -14.67%; 95% CI, -23.62% to -4.66%). Among 4 components of SRH, a greater reduction in semen quality was estimated for reproductive-related SRH compared with overall SRH, whereas the greatest reduction was observed for reproductive-related physical SRH. In comparison with men with very good reproductive-related physical SRH, men with poor reproductive-related physical SRH had differences of -24.78% (95% CI, -32.71% to -15.93%) and -25.61% (95% CI, -33.95% to -16.22%) in sperm count and concentration, respectively, and regression coefficients of -9.38 (95% CI, -12.01 to -6.76) and -9.24 (95% CI, -11.82 to -6.66) for sperm motility and sperm progressive motility, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of Chinese men, poorer SRH was associated with lower semen quality, and reproductive-related physical SRH was the most pronounced indicator. Our findings suggest that SRH, especially reproductive-related physical SRH, was a good indicator of semen quality, which should inform public and clinical regulatory decisions.
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.