Evidence for a stimulatory role of follicle-stimulating hormone on the spermatogonial population in adult males
Assessed by RV009 · Systematic reviewer
Assessed on 13 Nov 2025
OverallReviewer's overall integrity assessment, derived from all research questions Some concerns
Resource ripekg:research-integrity-assessment/RIPEAEDF2C24AA6E70305
5 Research Questions · 3 Evidence Items
Q1.1 — Does the study have an associated retraction?
Rationale: I agree
Q1.2 — Does the study have an associated expression of concern or other relevant post-publication notice?
Rationale: While the PubPeer analysis failing creates some uncertainty for this study, I proceeded on the basis that the authors were clean unless firm evidence suggested otherwise.
Q1.3 — Do other studies by the research team highlight causes for concern?
Rationale: I agree with INSPECT-AI, as I was already aware of this retracted paper through my involvement in the review. However, clicking on the DOI link provided above did not take me to the journal’s retraction notice for verification — it only directed me to a generic website.
Supporting Evidence (1)
Retraction NoticeSource: Retraction Watch database
Expression of phosphodiesterase type 5A in human spermatozoa and influence of its inhibition on motility and functional sperm parameters
10.3275/7142 (opens in new tab)RetractionWatch ID:Record identifier in the Retraction Watch database 17286
Rationale: Notice - Limited or No Information;Removed
About Authors: Carlo Foresta, Foresta, Andrea Garolla, Alberto Ferlin
Q2.2 — Are there concerns relating to the timing or absence of study registration?
Rationale: I agree
Supporting Evidence (2)
Clinical Trial RegistrationSource: Clinical trial registry (e.g. ClinicalTrials.gov, ISRCTN)
No trial registration found
Assessment Rationale:How INSPECT-AI determined the prospective registration status by comparing dates LLM-extracted recruitment start date (normalized_date) is missing or empty.
Study Design EvidenceDates and timelines extracted by INSPECT-AI from the publication text
Recruitment Start: N/A
Recruitment Start Rationale:INSPECT-AI's reasoning for how it identified the recruitment start date No recruitment start date found after a full search of the document.
Recruitment End: N/A
Recruitment End Rationale:INSPECT-AI's reasoning for how it identified the recruitment end date No recruitment end date found after a full search of the document.
Study End: N/A
Study End Rationale:INSPECT-AI's reasoning for how it identified the study end date No study end date found after a full search of the document.
Overall — What is the overall integrity assessment of the study?
Rationale: I chose “some concerns” because, although the author team has one retracted paper, there is no clear evidence linking that retraction to the paper currently being assessed.