ArticleAsian journal of andrology2025
Exploration of evaluation criteria based on the biological variation in the external quality assessment for basic semen analysis in China.
Article in Asian journal of andrology, 2025. 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.
- Effectiveness of short-term, high-intensive, WHO laboratory standard-based training in sperm morphology assessment: evidence from a national program in China.Asian journal of andrology · 2026Article
- Still counting sperm? Why novel, truly informative measurements of testis function in male infertility are urgently needed.Endocrine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
abstractThis study explores whether the current external quality assessment (EQA) level and acceptable bias for basic semen analysis in China are clinically useful. We collected data of semen EQA from Andrology laboratories in the Hunan Province (China) in 2022 and searched for data in the published literature from January 2000 to December 2023 in China. On the basis of these data, we analyzed the coefficients of variation and acceptable biases of different quality control materials for basic semen analysis through robust statistics. We compared these findings with quality specifications based on biological variation from optimal, desirable, and minimum levels of bias to seek a unified and more suitable semen EQA bias evaluation standard for China's national conditions. Different sources of semen quality control material exhibited considerable variation in acceptable biases among laboratories, ranging from 8.2% to 56.9%. A total of 50.0% of the laboratories met the minimum quality specifications for progressive motility (PR), whereas 100.0% and 75.0% of laboratories met only the minimum quality specifications for sperm concentration and total motility (nonprogressive [NP] + PR), respectively. The Z value for sperm concentration and PR+NP was equivalent to the desirable performance specification, whereas the Z value for PR was equivalent only to the minimum performance specification. This study highlights the feasibility of operating external quality assessment schemes for basic semen analysis using quality specifications based on biological variation. These specifications should be unified among external quality control (EQC) centers based on biological variation.
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.