These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
26. Quality control of laboratory methods for semen evaluation in a multicenter research study. Brazil C; Swan SH; Tollner CR; Treece C; Drobnis EZ; Wang C; Redmon JB; Overstreet JW; J Androl; 2004; 25(4):645-56. PubMed ID: 15223854 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Validation of image cytometry for sperm concentration measurement: Comparison with manual counting of 4010 human semen samples. Egeberg Palme DL; Johannsen TH; Petersen JH; Skakkebæk NE; Juul A; Jørgensen N; Almstrup K Clin Chim Acta; 2017 May; 468():114-119. PubMed ID: 28242391 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. The accuracy of sperm concentration determination by the automated CellSoft semen analyzer before and after discontinuous Percoll gradient centrifugation. Chan SY; Tsoi WL; Leung J; Ng V; Lo T; Wang C Andrologia; 1990; 22(1):55-61. PubMed ID: 2177962 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Computer-assisted analysis of motility, velocity and linearity of dog spermatozoa. Günzel-Apel AR; Günther C; Terhaer P; Bader H J Reprod Fertil Suppl; 1993; 47():271-8. PubMed ID: 8229935 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Manual versus computer-automated semen analyses. Part I. Comparison of counting chambers. Johnson JE; Boone WR; Blackhurst DW Fertil Steril; 1996 Jan; 65(1):150-5. PubMed ID: 8557132 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Accuracy and precision of computer-aided sperm analysis in multicenter studies. Davis RO; Rothmann SA; Overstreet JW Fertil Steril; 1992 Mar; 57(3):648-53. PubMed ID: 1740213 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. The influence of chamber characteristics on the reliability of sperm concentration and movement measurements obtained by manual and videomicrographic analysis. Ginsburg KA; Armant DR Fertil Steril; 1990 May; 53(5):882-7. PubMed ID: 2332061 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Variability, repeatability and phenotypic relationships of several characteristics of production and semen quality in rabbit. García-Tomás M; Sánchez J; Rafel O; Ramon J; Piles M Anim Reprod Sci; 2006 Jun; 93(1-2):88-100. PubMed ID: 16084038 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. The comparison of assessment of pigeon semen motility and sperm concentration by conventional methods and the CASA system (HTM IVOS). Klimowicz MD; Nizanski W; Batkowski F; Savic MA Theriogenology; 2008 Jul; 70(1):77-82. PubMed ID: 18423566 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. A comparison of Makler counting chamber and improved Neubauer hemocytometer in sperm concentration measurement. Sukcharoen N; Ngeamjirawat J; Chanprasit Y; Aribarg A J Med Assoc Thai; 1994 Sep; 77(9):471-6. PubMed ID: 7706966 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Characterization of a computerized semen analysis system. Pedigo NG; Vernon MW; Curry TE Fertil Steril; 1989 Oct; 52(4):659-66. PubMed ID: 2680622 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Use of automated imaging and analysis technology for the detection of aneuploidy in human sperm. Carrell DT; Emery BR Fertil Steril; 2008 Aug; 90(2):434-7. PubMed ID: 17936284 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Accuracy of computer-assisted semen analysis in prefreeze and post-thaw specimens with high and low sperm counts and motility. Sidhu RS; Sharma RK; Lee JC; Agarwal A Urology; 1998 Feb; 51(2):306-12. PubMed ID: 9495716 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]