| Title |
Novel concepts in male factor infertility: clinical and laboratory perspectives
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10815-016-0763-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sandro C. Esteves |
| Abstract |
In recent years, the management of male factor infertility has undergone important changes with the introduction of novel concepts, advanced testing, and therapeutic interventions. This review highlights some of these changes and discusses their impact to routine clinical practice. First, we discuss the recent changes in the World Health Organization (WHO) laboratory methods and reference values for the examination of human semen. Second, we examine the role of sperm chromatin integrity tests in light of increasing evidence of the detrimental effect of sperm DNA fragmentation on reproductive outcomes. Third, we summarize the main findings of varicocele-related infertility and the outcomes of microsurgical varicocele repair to different case scenarios. Lastly, we critically discuss the current management of men with nonobstructive azoospermia seeking fertility and the new opportunities that emerged to help these men achieve biological fatherhood. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 33% |
| France | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 152 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 151 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 24 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 22 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 11% |
| Researcher | 13 | 9% |
| Other | 10 | 7% |
| Other | 27 | 18% |
| Unknown | 40 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 45 | 30% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 23 | 15% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 21 | 14% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 4% |
| Engineering | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 11 | 7% |
| Unknown | 43 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 19 October 2016.
All research outputs
#14,893,418
of 24,119,703 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics
#832
of 1,697 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#208,290
of 362,983 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics
#11
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,119,703 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,697 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 362,983 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.