ArticleHealth science reports2024
Effect of alternative and complementary medicine on male infertility: An umbrella review.
Article in Health science reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of alternative and complementary medicine on male infertility: An umbrella review.Health science reports · 2024Article
- Optimizing Testosterone Levels and Fertility Outcomes: A Case Series on the Impact ofAmerican journal of men's healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: There is increasing interest worldwide in using alternative and complementary approaches for treating male infertility. This interest has spawned a multitude of published systematic reviews and meta-analyses. The aim of this Umbrella review was to consolidate the available evidence regarding the effect of complementary and alternative medicine on male infertility to inform clinical decision-making processes. Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted to identify systematic reviews and meta-analyses pertaining to the effects of complementary and alternative medicine on male infertility. This search encompassed various databases including MEDLINE, CINAHL, PubMed, Scopus, Proquest, Google Scholar, SID, EMBASE, Magiran, Cochrane Library, Iranmedex, ScienceDirect, SAGE. Subsequently, two researchers independently extracted the data from the selected meta-analyses and systematic reviews, and evaluated their methodological quality using the assessment of multiple systematic reviews 2 (AMSTAR2). Results: This analysis encompassed 11 studies, with four originating from Iran, two from Korea and five from China. The results regarding the effectiveness of complementary and alternative medicine are controversial, indicating a need for further research. The methodological quality of the systematic reviews and meta-analyses appraised by AMSTAR 2 was rated as low or critically low. This assessment is attributed to inadequate examination of publication biases in the reviews and a lack of discussion regarding the effect of risk of bias. Conclusion: The existing evidence regarding the effectiveness of alternative and complementary medicine in addressing male infertility is limited. Furthermore, the overall methodological quality of the published systematic reviews and meta-analyses may have been underestimated as the use of AMSTAR2 appears to be a more precise appraisal instrument compared to its predecessor.
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.