Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39350795›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in toxicology2024

Light pollution: time to consider testicular effects.

Peter Y Liu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in toxicology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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

1 author.

Peter Y LiuDivision of Endocrinology, Department of Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Harbor-UCLA Medical Center and Genomics Institute, The Lundquist Institute, Torrance, CA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Technological advances have led to a modern-day lighting and smartphone revolution, with artificial light exposure at night increasing to levels never before seen in the evolutionary history of living systems on Earth. Light as a pollutant, however, remains largely unrecognized, and the reproductive effects of light pollution are mostly if not entirely unconsidered. This is despite the reproductive system being intricately linked to metabolism and the circadian system, both of which can be disturbed even by low levels of light. Here, we aim to change this perspective by reviewing the physiological and pathophysiological mechanisms by which light exposure alters the intricate hormonal, metabolic and reproductive networks that are relevant to reproductive toxicology. Nascent human studies have recently identified the photoreceptors responsible for the light dose relationship with melatonin suppression and circadian re-entrainment, directly shown the association between the alignment of light-dark cycles with activity-rest cycles on metabolic health and provided proof-of-principle that properly timed blue light-enriched and blue light-depleted delivery can accelerate circadian re-entrainment. With these advances, there is now a need to consider testicular effects of light pollution.

Indexed as

circadianclockfertilityLeydig celltestosterone

Identifiers

PMID39350795
PMCPMC11439877

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.