ArticleBiomedical reports2025
Effects of androgen replacement therapy on cognitive function in patients with hypogonadism: A systematic review and meta‑analysis.
Article in Biomedical reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Neurocognitive function in males with 46,XX testicular difference of sex development.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hypogonadism, characterized by low testosterone levels, is linked to cognitive decline, particularly in memory and executive function. Androgen replacement therapy (ART) aims to counter these deficits by restoring testosterone levels. In the present systematic review and meta-analysis, it was hypothesized that ART improves cognitive function in hypogonadal men, with domain-specific effects. A comprehensive literature search was conducted across databases up to October 2024, identifying 14 studies that met inclusion criteria. Cognitive outcomes were categorized into memory, attention, executive function and visuospatial abilities, and a meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model. Study heterogeneity was evaluated using prediction interval statistics, and sensitivity analyses were conducted. Publication bias was assessed using Begg's and Egger's tests, with adjustments using the trim-and-fill method. The meta-analysis demonstrated statistically significant but domain-specific cognitive effects of ART. The pooled standardized mean difference (SMD) for overall cognition was 0.454 (95% CI: 0.341-0.566; P<0.001). Domain-specific analyses revealed that ART led to improvements in executive function (SMD=0.488; 95% CI: 0.372-0.604; P<0.001) and memory (SMD=0.457; 95% CI: 0.338-0.577; P<0.001), but smaller effects were observed in attention (SMD=0.217; 95% CI: 0.084-0.351; P=0.001) and visuospatial abilities (SMD=0.226; 95% CI: 0.146-0.306; P<0.001). Sensitivity analyses confirmed the stability of the findings. Despite the detection of publication bias (Kendall's tau = 0.265, P<0.001; Egger's intercept = 1.92, P<0.001), the adjusted effect size remained consistent after applying the trim-and-fill method. Study heterogeneity was moderate, likely reflecting variations in cognitive assessment tools and intervention protocols. ART significantly improves executive function and memory in hypogonadal men, while the impact on attention and visuospatial abilities is less pronounced. These findings underscore the domain-specific nature of ART's cognitive benefits and highlight the importance of considering study heterogeneity when interpreting results. Clinically, this suggests that ART may be more effective in targeting memory and executive function deficits. However, the modest effect sizes and presence of publication bias indicate a need for further research to refine protocols, including standardized cognitive assessments and exploration of long-term effects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.