Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Semen analysis performed by different laboratory teams: an intervariation study

N Jørgensen1, J Auger, A Giwercman

  • 1Department of Growth and Reproduction, Juliane Marie Center, National University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.

International Journal of Andrology
|August 1, 1997
PubMed
Summary

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Hyponatremia, hypernatremia and impairment of functional, psychological and sexual domains.

Journal of endocrinological investigation·2023
Same author

Mixed higher-order anisotropic flow and nonlinear response coefficients of charged particles in <math></math> collisions at <math> </math> and 5.02 <math></math>.

The European physical journal. C, Particles and fields·2020
Same author

Measurement of the Jet Mass Distribution and Top Quark Mass in Hadronic Decays of Boosted Top Quarks in pp Collisions at sqrt[s]=13  TeV.

Physical review letters·2020
Same author

Constraints on the χ_{c1} versus χ_{c2} Polarizations in Proton-Proton Collisions at sqrt[s]=8  TeV.

Physical review letters·2020
Same author

Search for a Narrow Resonance Lighter than 200 GeV Decaying to a Pair of Muons in Proton-Proton Collisions at sqrt[s]=13  TeV.

Physical review letters·2020
Same author

Search for direct pair production of supersymmetric partners to the <math></math> lepton in proton-proton collisions at <math> </math>.

The European physical journal. C, Particles and fields·2020

This study examined how much variation exists in semen analysis results between different laboratories. Four teams analyzed 26 semen samples using their own methods and equipment. They found that sperm concentration and semen volume were consistent across labs, but motility and morphology assessments showed significant differences. This suggests that while some parameters can be reliably compared, others need standardized protocols to ensure consistency. The findings highlight the need for unified methods in specific areas of semen analysis to improve data comparability.

Area of Science:

  • Andrology and reproductive medicine
  • Clinical laboratory diagnostics
  • Reproductive health epidemiology

Background:

Prior research has shown sperm concentration trends vary by region, but global patterns remain unclear. Established knowledge includes the role of semen analysis in fertility assessments. However, one unresolved issue is the reliability of results across different laboratories. Some studies propose that sperm concentration has declined over decades, but geographic inconsistencies challenge this claim. A key limitation is the lack of standardized methods for semen analysis. This gap motivated the need to evaluate interlaboratory variability. No prior work had resolved how much variation arises from laboratory practices versus biological differences. This uncertainty drives the need for controlled studies comparing laboratory results.

Purpose Of The Study:

The aim of this study was to assess interlaboratory variability in semen analysis results. The specific problem addressed was the lack of standardized methods across diagnostic centers. The motivation stemmed from the need to determine which semen parameters can be reliably compared. The researchers focused on sperm concentration, motility, morphology, and semen volume. They selected four laboratory teams with prior publications on semen quality. The goal was to evaluate consistency using their own protocols and equipment. This approach allowed direct comparison of results under normal conditions. The study aimed to identify which parameters require further standardization.

Keywords:
semen analysis variabilitysperm motility assessmentlaboratory standardizationreproductive health diagnostics

Frequently Asked Questions

The study found sperm concentration and volume can be reliably compared between labs, but motility and morphology assessments require standardization.

Each lab used its own equipment and methods to analyze 26 semen samples, then a random effects model estimated the variation between labs.

The study found significant interlaboratory differences in these parameters, suggesting current methods lack consistency for reliable comparisons.

A random effects model was used to quantify interlaboratory variation in semen analysis results.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Methods:

Four laboratory teams, each with a physician and technician, participated in the study. Twenty-six fresh semen samples were collected from unselected men. Each team analyzed the samples using their standard procedures and equipment. No predefined protocol was imposed on the participants. The teams assessed sperm concentration, motility, morphology, and semen volume. Data collection occurred independently at each laboratory site. A random effects model was used to estimate interlaboratory variation. This statistical approach allowed quantification of variability beyond individual differences.

Main Results:

Sperm concentration and semen volume showed high interlaboratory consistency. The random effects model revealed minimal variation between the four teams for these parameters. In contrast, sperm motility assessment showed significant variability across laboratories. Morphology evaluation also displayed considerable interlaboratory differences. The study found that inter-individual variation exceeded interlaboratory differences for motility and morphology. For sperm concentration and volume, similar methodologies produced comparable results. These findings suggest that standardization is critical for motility and morphology assessments. The results highlight the need for unified protocols in these areas.

Conclusions:

The authors propose that sperm concentration and semen volume can be reliably compared between laboratories. However, motility and morphology assessments require further standardization. The study does not claim that all variability is due to methodology alone. It suggests that current practices for motility and morphology lack consistency. The findings do not support the idea that all parameters are equally reliable across centers. The authors emphasize the importance of standardized protocols for specific parameters. They do not argue that all semen analysis results are currently comparable. The study concludes that some parameters already allow reliable comparisons. It does not propose new diagnostic criteria or treatment recommendations.

Failed At:

2026-07-14T07:45:15.164201+00:00

Twenty-six fresh semen samples from unselected men were analyzed by four laboratory teams.

The study suggests sperm concentration can be reliably compared between labs when similar methodologies are used.