Back to publication

Treatment of male idiopathic infertility with recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone: a prospective, controlled, randomized clinical study

Assessed by RV009 · Systematic reviewer

Assessed on 13 Nov 2025

OverallReviewer's overall integrity assessment, derived from all research questions Some concerns

DOI 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.03.055 (opens in new tab)

Resource ripekg:research-integrity-assessment/RIPEAFD472E5D4DA5C642

5 Research Questions · 3 Evidence Items

Q1.1 — Does the study have an associated retraction?

Automated Assessment:Assessment produced by the automated systemNo
Human Assessment:Assessment by a domain expert reviewer, informed by AI resultsNo

Rationale: I agree

Q1.2 — Does the study have an associated expression of concern or other relevant post-publication notice?

Automated Assessment:Assessment produced by the automated systemNo
Human Assessment:Assessment by a domain expert reviewer, informed by AI resultsNo

Rationale: I agree

Q1.3 — Do other studies by the research team highlight causes for concern?

Automated Assessment:Assessment produced by the automated systemYes
Human Assessment:Assessment by a domain expert reviewer, informed by AI resultsYes

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)
Journal: Journal of Endocrinological InvestigationPublisher: SpringerDate: 1 Jul 2010

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?

Automated Assessment:Assessment produced by the automated systemUnclear
Human Assessment:Assessment by a domain expert reviewer, informed by AI resultsUnclear

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 Registry registration date (study_first_submit_qc_date) is missing or empty.

Study Design EvidenceDates and timelines extracted by INSPECT-AI from the publication text

Recruitment Start: 28-09-2004

Recruitment Start Rationale:INSPECT-AI's reasoning for how it identified the recruitment start date Received September 28, 2004; no explicit recruitment start date, using the date the article was received as a proxy.

Recruitment End: 15-03-2005

Recruitment End Rationale:INSPECT-AI's reasoning for how it identified the recruitment end date Revised and accepted March 15, 2005; no explicit recruitment end date, using the date the article was accepted as a proxy.

Study End: N/A

Study End Rationale:INSPECT-AI's reasoning for how it identified the study end date No explicit study end date found.

Overall — What is the overall integrity assessment of the study?

Automated Assessment:Assessment produced by the automated systemN/A
Human Assessment:Assessment by a domain expert reviewer, informed by AI resultsSome concerns

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.