180 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34729967)
1. Accuracy comparison study of new smartphone-based semen analyzer versus laboratory sperm quality analyzer.
Park MJ; Lim MY; Park HJ; Park NC
Investig Clin Urol; 2021 Nov; 62(6):672-680. PubMed ID: 34729967
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Validation of a smartphone-based, computer-assisted sperm analysis system compared with laboratory-based manual microscopic semen analysis and computer-assisted semen analysis.
Cheon WH; Park HJ; Park MJ; Lim MY; Park JH; Kang BJ; Park NC
Investig Clin Urol; 2019 Sep; 60(5):380-387. PubMed ID: 31501801
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Novel device for male infertility screening with single-ball lens microscope and smartphone.
Kobori Y; Pfanner P; Prins GS; Niederberger C
Fertil Steril; 2016 Sep; 106(3):574-8. PubMed ID: 27336208
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Home sperm testing device versus laboratory sperm quality analyzer: comparison of motile sperm concentration.
Agarwal A; Panner Selvam MK; Sharma R; Master K; Sharma A; Gupta S; Henkel R
Fertil Steril; 2018 Dec; 110(7):1277-1284. PubMed ID: 30424879
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Double-blind prospective study comparing two automated sperm analyzers versus manual semen assessment.
Lammers J; Splingart C; Barrière P; Jean M; Fréour T
J Assist Reprod Genet; 2014 Jan; 31(1):35-43. PubMed ID: 24242989
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Ability and accuracy of the smartphone-based O`VIEW-M® sperm test: Useful tool in the era of Covid-19.
Kim KS; Kim JH; Roh JH; Kim D; Kim HM; Jo JK
PLoS One; 2022; 17(6):e0269894. PubMed ID: 35709172
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Evaluation of the sperm motility analyzer system (SMAS) for the assessment of sperm quality in infertile men.
Akashi T; Watanabe A; Komiya A; Fuse H
Syst Biol Reprod Med; 2010 Dec; 56(6):473-7. PubMed ID: 20662592
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Manual vs. computer-assisted sperm analysis: can CASA replace manual assessment of human semen in clinical practice?
Talarczyk-Desole J; Berger A; Taszarek-Hauke G; Hauke J; Pawelczyk L; Jedrzejczak P
Ginekol Pol; 2017; 88(2):56-60. PubMed ID: 28326513
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Comparison of different counting chambers using a computer-assisted semen analyzer.
Peng N; Zou X; Li L
Syst Biol Reprod Med; 2015; 61(5):307-13. PubMed ID: 26214093
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Usefulness of sperm quality analyzer-V (SQA-V) for the assessment of sperm quality in infertile men.
Akashi T; Mizuno I; Okumura A; Fuse H
Arch Androl; 2005; 51(6):437-42. PubMed ID: 16214729
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [Comparison of the parameters obtained by sperm quality analyzer V and computer-aided sperm analysis system].
Ge YF; Wang CH; Shao Y; Yao B; Wu D; Xia XY; Shang XJ; Huang YF
Zhonghua Nan Ke Xue; 2008 Oct; 14(10):923-6. PubMed ID: 19157106
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Semen parameter thresholds and time-to-conception in subfertile couples: how high is high enough?
Keihani S; Verrilli LE; Zhang C; Presson AP; Hanson HA; Pastuszak AW; Johnstone EB; Hotaling JM
Hum Reprod; 2021 Jul; 36(8):2121-2133. PubMed ID: 34097024
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. At-home sperm testing for epidemiologic studies: Evaluation of the Trak male fertility testing system in an internet-based preconception cohort.
Sommer GJ; Wang TR; Epperson JG; Hatch EE; Wesselink AK; Rothman KJ; Fredriksen LL; Schaff UY; Behr B; Eisenberg ML; Wise LA
Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol; 2020 Sep; 34(5):504-512. PubMed ID: 31838751
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Can the Sperm Class Analyser (SCA) CASA-Mot system for human sperm motility analysis reduce imprecision and operator subjectivity and improve semen analysis?
Dearing C; Jayasena C; Lindsay K
Hum Fertil (Camb); 2021 Jul; 24(3):208-218. PubMed ID: 31056980
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Manual versus computer-automated semen analyses. Part II. Determination of the working range of a computer-automated semen analyzer.
Johnson JE; Boone WR; Blackhurst DW
Fertil Steril; 1996 Jan; 65(1):156-9. PubMed ID: 8557133
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Risk of childhood mortality in family members of men with poor semen quality.
Hanson HA; Mayer EN; Anderson RE; Aston KI; Carrell DT; Berger J; Lowrance WT; Smith KR; Hotaling JM
Hum Reprod; 2017 Jan; 32(1):239-247. PubMed ID: 27927843
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. An automated smartphone-based diagnostic assay for point-of-care semen analysis.
Kanakasabapathy MK; Sadasivam M; Singh A; Preston C; Thirumalaraju P; Venkataraman M; Bormann CL; Draz MS; Petrozza JC; Shafiee H
Sci Transl Med; 2017 Mar; 9(382):. PubMed ID: 28330865
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. [Comparison of four methods for sperm counting].
Hu YA; Lu JC; Lu NQ; Shao Y; Huang YF
Zhonghua Nan Ke Xue; 2006 Mar; 12(3):222-4, 227. PubMed ID: 16597036
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Manual versus computer-automated semen analysis.
Köse M; Sokmensuer LK; Demir A; Bozdag G; Gunalp S
Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol; 2014; 41(6):662-4. PubMed ID: 25551959
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Assessment of the Sperm Quality Analyzer.
Johnston RC; Clarke GN; Liu DY; Baker HW
Fertil Steril; 1995 May; 63(5):1071-6. PubMed ID: 7720920
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
