Semen parameters, including WHO and strict criteria morphology, in a fertile and subfertile population: an effort towards standardization of in-vivo thresholds
Abstract
In this study, the semen analysis results of a fertile population were compared with those from a subfertile population, in order to establish normal cut-off values for the standard semen parameters with the aid of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. The fertile group comprised healthy males (n = 107) without any history of fertility problems, the partners of whom had had a spontaneous pregnancy within one year of unprotected intercourse and were pregnant at the time of the male's inclusion into the study. A total of 103 males from couples attending the infertility clinic, and with an initial sperm count of <20x10(6)/ml were recruited to form the subfertile population. The best discriminating parameter between the two populations was sperm morphology evaluated according to WHO criteria at a cut-off point of 31% normal spermatozoa. The other cut-off values were at 8% for the acrosome index, 45% for motility, and 4% normal spermatozoa for strict criteria. Recalculating the ROC curve cut-off values based on an assumed 50% prevalence of subfertility in an assisted reproductive setting, the cut-off points were reduced to 21% and 3% normal spermatozoa for WHO and strict criteria respectively. For motility, the new cut-off value was at 20% motile spermatozoa, for motility quality at 3.5 (on a scale of 1-6), the acrosome index at 3% normal acrosomes, and the teratozoospermia index at 2.09.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The TZI cannot assess men's fertility potential because of significant overlap in values between fertile and sub-fertile populations.
“The TZI cannot assess men's fertility potential because of significant overlap in values between fertile and sub‐fertile populations, as demonstrated by [71] and published in the WHO recommendations, fifth edition.”
From Recommendations for Human Sperm Morphology Assessment in 2025: An Expert Review From the French BLEFCO Group (2026) · cites this paper as [71]
Cites
The evaluation of morphological characteristics of human spermatozoa according to stricter criteria
Menkveld, R., Stander, F. S. H., Kotze, T. J. V., Kruger, T. F., & Zyl, J. A. V. (1990) · Human Reproduction · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a137150 · Cited by 677 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
World Health Organization reference values for human semen characteristics*‡
Cooper, T. G., Noonan, E., von Eckardstein, S., Auger, J., Baker, H. W. G., Behre, H. M., Haugen, T. B., Kruger, T., Wang, C., Mbizvo, M. T., et al. (2010) · Human Reproduction Update · doi:10.1093/humupd/dmp048 · Cited by 2,827 · see citing works
Slama, R. (2002) · Human Reproduction · doi:10.1093/humrep/17.2.503 · Cited by 308 · see citing works
Relationship amongst teratozoospermia, seminal oxidative stress and male infertility
Agarwal, A., Tvrda, E., & Sharma, R. (2014) · Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology · doi:10.1186/1477-7827-12-45 · Cited by 176 · see citing works
Gonad evaluation in male systemic lupus erythematosus
Soares, P. M. F., Borba, E. F., Bonfa, E., Hallak, J., Corrêa, A. L., & Silva, C. A. A. (2007) · Arthritis & Rheumatism · doi:10.1002/art.22660 · Cited by 130 · see citing works
Affordable IVF for developing countries
Ombelet, W., & Campo, R. (2007) · Reproductive BioMedicine Online · doi:10.1016/s1472-6483(10)60337-9 · Cited by 107 · see citing works
Sperm morphology: classification drift over time and clinical implications
Morbeck, D. E., Leonard, P. H., Weaver, A. L., Shimek, K. M., Bouwsma, E. V. A., & Coddington, C. C. (2011) · Fertility and Sterility · doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.08.036 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
Viardot-Foucault, V., Tai, B. C., Prasath, E. B., Lau, M. S., Chan, J. K., & Loh, S. F. (2014) · Annals of the Academy of Medicine, Singapore · doi:10.47102/annals-acadmedsg.v43n4p225 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Gatimel, N., Barbotin, A., Mery, L., Beauvillard, D., Bendayan, M., Boursier, A., Boueilh, T., Pereira, B., Chammas, J., Jacquet, J., et al. (2026) · Andrology · doi:10.1111/andr.70134 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
- Authors
- Menkveld, R.
- Affiliations
- Stellenbosch University (ZA)
- Corresponding author
- Menkveld, R.
- ORCID
- Menkveld, R.
- Venue
- Human Reproduction
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2001-06-01
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1165-1171
- ISSN
- 0268-1161 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-2350
- OpenAlex
- W2109506976
- Cited by
- 265
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 12
- FWCI
- 5.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Human Reproduction (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
- SUNScholar (Stellenbosch University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Sperm and Testicular Function
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Reproductive Health and Technologies
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Male Reproductive Health Studies
- Keywords
- semen parameters, sperm morphology, WHO criteria, subfertility, sperm motility, male infertility, receiver operating characteristic
- MeSH terms
- Acrosome, Adult, Humans, Hydrogen-Ion Concentration, Infertility, Male, Male, Reference Values, ROC Curve, Semen, Sperm Count, Sperm Motility, Spermatozoa, World Health Organization
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review