ReviewFrontiers in nutrition2026
Ultra-processed food intake and male reproductive function: a mini-review.
Review in Frontiers in nutrition, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ultra-processed foods (UPFs) are a prominent feature of contemporary diets, but their relevance to male reproductive health remains uncertain. This mini-review synthesizes human evidence linking UPF intake with semen quality, asthenozoospermia, fertility-related outcomes, and reproductive biomarkers. Case-control, cross-sectional, prospective, and short-term controlled feeding studies generally report unfavorable associations, most consistently with lower sperm concentration and impaired motility; findings for morphology, semen volume, and other semen domains are less consistent. Prospective evidence links higher paternal UPF intake with lower fecundability and greater subfertility risk, while a controlled feeding trial indicates short-term changes in reproductive hormones, sperm function, and cardiometabolic markers. Interpretation is limited because UPF intake covaries with overall diet quality and lifestyle, exposure metrics and reproductive endpoints are heterogeneous, samples are modest, and clinically meaningful fertility outcomes are scarce. Current findings are therefore suggestive rather than causal. Larger prospective studies with repeated dietary and reproductive assessment, together with longer controlled trials, are needed to determine whether reducing UPF intake as part of broader dietary improvement benefits male reproductive health.
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.