Evidence mapPaperPMID 42426441Full record

ReviewJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2026

Bioinformatics and multi-omics approaches in male infertility: implications for diagnosis and assisted reproduction.

Dilara Onemli, Leyla Sati

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2026. 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

2 authors.

Dilara OnemliDepartment of Histology and Embryology, Akdeniz University School of Medicine, Antalya, Turkey.
Leyla SatiDepartment of Histology and Embryology, Akdeniz University School of Medicine, Antalya, Turkey. leylasati@yahoo.com.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1801-2021

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Male infertility accounts for approximately 40-50% of infertility cases worldwide and represents a complex, multifactorial condition influenced by genetic, epigenetic, transcriptomic, proteomic, and metabolic alterations. Despite advances in clinical evaluation, including semen analysis and hormonal profiling, nearly one-third of cases remain classified as idiopathic, highlighting the limitations of conventional diagnostic approaches. In this context, bioinformatics has emerged as a central discipline for integrating and interpreting large-scale biological data generated by high-throughput sequencing and multi-omics technologies. This review provides a comprehensive overview of current bioinformatic applications in male infertility research, encompassing genomic analyses, transcriptomic profiling, epigenetic regulation, proteomic and metabolomic signatures, and artificial intelligence-based approaches. We discuss how integrative multi-omics strategies and computational pipelines enable the identification of novel candidate genes, molecular pathways, and clinically relevant biomarkers associated with impaired spermatogenesis and sperm dysfunction. Furthermore, the translational impact of bioinformatics in assisted reproductive technologies, including sperm and embryo selection, preimplantation genetic testing, and clinical decision support, is highlighted. Collectively, this review underscores the pivotal role of bioinformatics in advancing mechanistic understanding, improving diagnostic precision, and paving the way toward personalized approaches in the management of male infertility.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceBioinformaticsMachine learningMale infertilityMulti-omics

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.