| Title |
The Role of Lifestyle in Male Infertility: Diet, Physical Activity, and Body Habitus
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Urology Reports, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11934-018-0805-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Russell P. Hayden, Ryan Flannigan, Peter N. Schlegel |
| Abstract |
Increasing attention to primary and secondary prevention of male infertility through modifiable lifestyle factors has gained traction amongst both patients and infertility specialists. In this review, the available evidence of modifiable lifestyle choices, specifically diet, physical activity, and body habitus, are evaluated. Studies examining diet, exercise/physical activity, and body habitus are characterized by conflicting conclusions, difficult confounders, and imperfect end points to judge male reproductive potential. However, convincing trends have emerged implicating consumption of saturated fats, pesticide exposure, high intensity exercise, and extremes of body mass index as detrimental to male fertility. Data assessing modifiable risk factors and subfertility in male partners has emphasized the notion of moderation. Balancing dietary fat, moderation of physical activity, and the management of a healthy body habitus favor both improvement of semen quality and birth outcomes. These observations provide actionable data for the reproductive urologist to better counsel men presenting with infertility. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 172 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 172 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 27 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 22 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 20 | 12% |
| Other | 8 | 5% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 5% |
| Other | 35 | 20% |
| Unknown | 52 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 51 | 30% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 21 | 12% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 11 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 7 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 21 | 12% |
| Unknown | 57 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 82. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 December 2022.
All research outputs
#507,524
of 24,938,276 outputs
Outputs from Current Urology Reports
#6
of 622 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,437
of 334,580 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Urology Reports
#4
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,938,276 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 622 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 334,580 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.