Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42725144›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in nutrition2026

Ultra-processed food intake and male reproductive function: a mini-review.

Jian Huang

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

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.

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

1 author.

Jian HuangClinical Laboratory Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

asthenozoospermiafecundabilityfertilitymale reproductive healthreproductive biomarkerssemen qualitysubfertilityultra-processed foods

Identifiers

PMID42725144
PMCPMC13560871

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.