Evidence mapPaperPMID 40261982Full record

ArticleReproduction & fertility2025

Artificial intelligence model for the assessment of unstained live sperm morphology.

Jermphiphut Jaruenpunyasak, Prawai Maneelert, Marwan Nawae, Chainarong Choksuchat

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Reproduction & fertility, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
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

4 authors.

Jermphiphut JaruenpunyasakDepartment of Biomedical Sciences and Biomedical Engineering, Faculty of Medicine, Prince of Songkla University, Songkhla, Thailand.
Prawai ManeelertDivision of Reproductive Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Faculty of Medicine, Prince of Songkla University, Songkhla, Thailand.
Marwan NawaeDepartment of Biomedical Sciences and Biomedical Engineering, Faculty of Medicine, Prince of Songkla University, Songkhla, Thailand.
Chainarong ChoksuchatDivision of Reproductive Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Faculty of Medicine, Prince of Songkla University, Songkhla, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0003-4392-4070

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Abstract: Traditional sperm morphology assessment requires staining and high magnification (100×), rendering sperm unsuitable for further use. We aimed to determine whether an in-house artificial intelligence (AI) model could reliably assess normal sperm morphology in living sperm and compare its performance with that of computer-aided semen analysis and conventional semen analysis methods. In this experimental study, we enrolled 30 healthy male volunteers aged 18-40 years at the Songklanagarind Assisted Reproductive Centre, Songklanagarind Hospital. We developed a novel dataset of sperm morphological images captured with confocal laser scanning microscopy at low magnification and high resolution to train and validate an AI model. Semen samples were divided into three aliquots and assessed for unstained live sperm morphology using the AI model, whereas computer-aided and conventional semen analysis methods evaluated fixed sperm morphology. The performance of our in-house AI model for evaluating unstained live sperm morphology was compared with that of the other two methods. The in-house AI model showed the strongest correlation with computer-aided semen analysis (r = 0.88), followed by conventional semen analysis (r = 0.76). The correlation between computer-aided semen analysis and conventional semen analysis was weaker (r = 0.57). Both the in-house AI and conventional semen analysis methods detected normal sperm morphology at significantly higher rates than computer-aided semen analysis. The in-house AI model could enhance assisted reproductive technology outcomes by improving the selection of high-quality sperm with normal morphology. This could lead to better outcomes of intracytoplasmic sperm injections and other fertility treatments. Lay summary: We evaluated a new in-house AI model for assessing the shape and size (morphology) of live sperm without staining and performed comparisons with computer-aided semen analysis and conventional semen analysis, which require sperm to be fixed and stained before analysis. This new method of assessing unstained, live sperm is significant because it facilitates viable sperm selection for use in assisted reproductive technology immediately after assessment, ultimately contributing to improved fertility outcomes. The AI model allowed sperm morphology assessments with significantly improved accuracy and reliability. By using high-resolution images and advanced microscopy, the AI model could detect subcellular features. This AI model could be an effective tool in clinical settings, because it minimizes subjectivity and improves sperm selection for assisted reproductive technologies, potentially leading to higher success rates in infertility treatments. Further research can refine the model and validate its effectiveness in diverse clinical environments.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceSemen AnalysisSpermatozoaAdolescentAdultHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMaleMicroscopy, ConfocalYoung Adultartificial intelligenceassisted reproductive technologyconfocal microscopysemen analysissperm morphology

Identifiers

PMID40261982
PMCPMC12060770

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.