ArticleAndrology2026
A prospective study of semen quality and fecundability among North American couples planning pregnancy.
Article in Andrology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFew studies have prospectively evaluated semen quality (using the most up-to-date clinically relevant definitions) and fecundability (the per-cycle probability of conception).
objectiveTo study semen quality in relation to fecundability. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe analyzed prospectively collected data from 763 male participants aged ≥21 years from Pregnancy Study Online (PRESTO), a North American preconception cohort study (2015-2024). Eligible participants for the semen testing substudy resided in the contiguous United States, had been attempting conception for ≤6 cycles at cohort entry, and had a female partner aged 21-45 years with regular menses. Participants used an at-home semen testing device to measure semen volume, sperm concentration, and motile sperm concentration. Participants contributed up to two semen tests during the preconception period (1376 total semen samples). We calculated sperm motility, total sperm count, and total motile sperm count. We evaluated results according to 2021 World Health Organization (WHO)-defined thresholds for low semen quality. Female participants reported their pregnancy status on bimonthly follow-up questionnaires for up to 12 cycles or until conception, whichever came first. We used proportional probabilities regression models to estimate fecundability ratios (FRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), adjusting for potential confounders.
resultsAfter accounting for censoring using life-table methods, 80.7% of couples conceived within 12 cycles. FRs were 1.48 (95% CI, 1.05-2.08) for low semen volume (≤1.5 vs. >1.5 mL), 0.74 (95% CI, 0.56-0.97) for low sperm concentration (≤16 vs. >16 million/mL), 0.98 (95% CI, 0.81-1.19) for low sperm motility (≤42 vs. >42%), 0.58 (95% CI, 0.38-0.88) for low total sperm count (≤39 vs. >39 million), and 0.73 (95% CI, 0.52-1.04) for low total motile sperm count (≤21 vs. >21 million). Associations between low total motile sperm count and fecundability were stronger among couples with <3 cycles of attempt time at cohort entry. DISCUSSION: In this prospective preconception cohort study of North American couples, most suboptimal semen parameters based on WHO criteria were associated with reduced fecundability, with the exception of low semen volume.
conclusionSemen quality at suboptimal levels may adversely affect fecundability.
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.