[A cross-sectional study on nonionizing radiation to male fertility].

Zhonghua liu xing bing xue za zhi = Zhonghua liuxingbingxue zazhi · 2004 · Mixed · Low evidence

← Research stream

MixedLow evidencePaper 6416

Study snapshot

PublicationZhonghua liu xing bing xue za zhi = Zhonghua liuxingbingxue zazhi · 2004

Study typecross_sectional

Reported directionMixed

Evidence ratingLow

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the relationship between microwave radiation and male reproductivity. METHODS: After filling out questionnaire and body check, we carried out molecular epidemiological studies, using single cell gel electrophoresis (SCGE) and sperm automatic analysis among people working on radar. RESULTS: Quality of semen and semi-clinical injury of sperm among the people working on radar had changed when radar electromagnetic wave frequency distance, intensity, lasting time and protection shield were changing. Dose-response relationship was noticed and the increase of sperm dysmorphia played a principal role. The results between exposed group and control group showed significant difference (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: People working on radar who suffered from non-ionization for long time and had bad radar shield protection would show semi-clinical injury on sperm and bad semen quality. However, it did not affect the male reproductive function. It was necessary to reinforce the protection of non-ionization and to improve male reproductive health care of people working on radar.

Machine Enhanced Logic

AI evidence extraction

Structured fields below were generated from the paper’s abstract and metadata to make the evidence easier to inspect. Automated extraction may be incomplete or incorrect; verify important details against the original paper.

Study typecross_sectional

Effect directionmixed

PopulationPeople working on radar (male workers implied)

Sample sizeNot supplied

Exposuremicrowave · long time (not further specified)

Evidence strengthLowConfidence: 74% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

Among radar workers, semen quality and semi-clinical sperm injury varied with radar electromagnetic wave frequency, distance, intensity, duration, and shielding; a dose-response relationship was reported, with increased sperm dysmorphia described as a principal factor. Exposed and control groups differed significantly (P < 0.01). The authors conclude that long-term exposure with poor shielding is associated with poorer semen quality and semi-clinical sperm injury, but that male reproductive function was not affected.

Outcomes measured

semen quality
sperm semi-clinical injury
sperm dysmorphia
SCGE (single cell gel electrophoresis) findings
male reproductive function

Limitations

Cross-sectional design (as stated in title)
Sample size not reported in abstract
Exposure metrics (frequency, distance, intensity) not quantified in abstract
Potential confounding and selection factors not described (questionnaire/body check mentioned but details not provided)
Outcome definition of 'male reproductive function' not specified in abstract

View raw extracted JSON

{
  "study_type": "cross_sectional",
  "exposure": {
    "band": "microwave",
    "source": "occupational (radar)",
    "frequency_mhz": null,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": "long time (not further specified)"
  },
  "population": "People working on radar (male workers implied)",
  "sample_size": null,
  "outcomes": [
    "semen quality",
    "sperm semi-clinical injury",
    "sperm dysmorphia",
    "SCGE (single cell gel electrophoresis) findings",
    "male reproductive function"
  ],
  "main_findings": "Among radar workers, semen quality and semi-clinical sperm injury varied with radar electromagnetic wave frequency, distance, intensity, duration, and shielding; a dose-response relationship was reported, with increased sperm dysmorphia described as a principal factor. Exposed and control groups differed significantly (P < 0.01). The authors conclude that long-term exposure with poor shielding is associated with poorer semen quality and semi-clinical sperm injury, but that male reproductive function was not affected.",
  "effect_direction": "mixed",
  "limitations": [
    "Cross-sectional design (as stated in title)",
    "Sample size not reported in abstract",
    "Exposure metrics (frequency, distance, intensity) not quantified in abstract",
    "Potential confounding and selection factors not described (questionnaire/body check mentioned but details not provided)",
    "Outcome definition of 'male reproductive function' not specified in abstract"
  ],
  "evidence_strength": "low",
  "confidence": 0.74,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "microwave radiation",
    "radar",
    "occupational exposure",
    "male fertility",
    "semen quality",
    "sperm dysmorphia",
    "SCGE",
    "nonionizing radiation"
  ],
  "suggested_hubs": [
    {
      "slug": "occupational-exposure",
      "weight": 0.95,
      "reason": "Study population is people working on radar with occupational microwave exposure."
    }
  ]
}

AI can be wrong. Always verify against the paper.

AI-extracted fields are generated from the abstract and metadata and may be incomplete or incorrect. This material is for informational purposes and is not medical advice.

Identifiers and source

DOI: Not supplied
PubMed: 15061945

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library