ReviewGenes2026
Non-Coding RNA Biomarkers in Male Infertility: From Discovery to Clinical Actionability-A Narrative Review.
Review in Genes, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Non-coding RNAs (ncRNAs) are biologically plausible biomarkers in male infertility, but no assay is ready for routine use. This narrative review organizes human evidence by intended clinical decision and defines clinical actionability as a test's ability to inform a specified decision through analytical reliability, clinical validity, incremental value, decision-level benefit, and feasible implementation. Evidence is most developed for obstructive versus non-obstructive azoospermia (NOA) classification and sperm-retrieval prognosis. Most reports, however, use selected case-control samples, single-center development cohorts, or same-program evaluations. Mixed biospecimens, incompletely specified RNA isoforms and normalization, uncertain cohort independence, imperfect diagnostic references, and protocol-dependent retrieval outcomes limit transportability. No independent geographic validation of a locked ncRNA assay or prospective evaluation of ncRNA-guided management was identified within the retrieved sources. Current guidelines do not recommend routine ncRNA testing. Progress requires prespecified intended uses, locked assays, representative multicenter validation, same-patient comparison with contemporary care, calibrated risk estimates, decision-curve analysis, and patient-important, couple-centered outcomes.
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.