Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39352676›Full record

ReviewBulletin of experimental biology and medicine2024

Comparative Characteristic of the Methods of Isolation of Oocytes and Spermatozoa in Laboratory Animals (Review).

Z R Khasanshina, D A Abdullaeva, N V Bogacheva

Abstract readReviewComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Bulletin of experimental biology and medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Z R KhasanshinaKirov State Medical University, Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, Kirov, Russia. khasanshina.99@mail.ru.
D A AbdullaevaKirov State Medical University, Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, Kirov, Russia.
N V BogachevaKirov State Medical University, Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, Kirov, Russia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Over the past decade, there has been an increasing trend in the use of assisted reproductive technologies, which have significantly expanded the opportunities to overcome the problem of infertility. However, the problem of increasing the effectiveness of in vitro fertilization remains open. Isolation of germ cells from animals is a necessary process for various experimental studies. Animal germ cells can be used in experiments to study physical, chemical, genetic, immunological, and microbiological factors affecting reproduction efficiency and for the development of techniques that increase the effectiveness of in vitro fertilization. All of the above determines the relevance of studying existing methods of oocyte and sperm isolation for experimental in vitro studies. Here we discuss the existing methods of sperm and oocyte isolation from animals and their advantages and disadvantages, and also substantiate priority methods for use.

Indexed as

Cell SeparationOocytesSpermatozoaAnimalsAnimals, LaboratoryFemaleFertilization in VitroMaleMiceassisted reproductive technologygerm cell isolation methodslaboratory animalsoocytessperm

Identifiers

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
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.