Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37371589›Full record

ReviewBiomolecules2023

Sperm and Oocyte Chromosomal Abnormalities.

Osamu Samura, Yoshiharu Nakaoka, Norio Miharu

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biomolecules, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. 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

3 authors.

Osamu SamuraDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo 105-8461, Japan.
Yoshiharu NakaokaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, IVF Namba Clinic, Osaka 550-0015, Japan.
Norio MiharuDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Hiroshima Red Cross Hospital & Atomic-bomb Survivors Hospital, Hiroshima 730-0052, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gametogenesis, the process of producing gametes, differs significantly between oocytes and sperm. Most oocytes have chromosomal aneuploidies, indicating that chromosomal aberrations in miscarried and newborn infants are of oocyte origin. Conversely, most structural anomalies are of sperm origin. A prolonged meiotic period caused by increasing female age is responsible for an increased number of chromosomal aberrations. Sperm chromosomes are difficult to analyze because they cannot be evaluated using somatic cell chromosome analysis methods. Nevertheless, researchers have developed methods for chromosome analysis of sperm using the fluorescence in situ hybridization method, hamster eggs, and mouse eggs, allowing for the cytogenetic evaluation of individual sperm. Reproductive medicine has allowed men with severe spermatogenic defects or chromosomal abnormalities to have children. However, using these techniques to achieve successful pregnancies results in higher rates of miscarriages and embryos with chromosomal abnormalities. This raises questions regarding which cases should undergo sperm chromosome analysis and how the results should be interpreted. Here, we reviewed clinical trials that have been reported on oocyte and sperm chromosome analyses. Examination of chromosomal abnormalities in gametes is critical in assisted reproductive technology. Therefore, it is necessary to continue to study the mechanism underlying gametic chromosomal abnormalities.

Indexed as

Chromosome AberrationsSemenAnimalsCricetinaeFemaleIn Situ Hybridization, FluorescenceMaleMiceOocytesPregnancySpermatozoaaneuploidygametogenesismeiosisoocytesperm chromosome

Identifiers

PMID37371589
PMCPMC10296299

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.