AUCTORES
Globalize your Research
Research Article | DOI: https://doi.org/10.31579/2578-8965/277
1Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
2Department of Biostatistics All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
*Corresponding Author: Nisha, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Citation: Neeta Singh, Supriya Kumari, Rekha Ramappa, Ashish D. Upadhyay, Nisha, (2025), Effect of Electromagnetic Radiation on Semen Parameters Among Males Seeking Infertility Treatment: A Cross-Sectional Observational Study, J. Obstetrics Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, 9(6) DOI:10.31579/2578-8965/277
Copyright: © 2025, Nisha. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of The Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Received: 11 August 2025 | Accepted: 18 August 2025 | Published: 25 August 2025
Keywords: mobile phone, radiofrequency-electromagnetic waves, semen parameters, infertility, telecommunication towers
Aim:
To evaluate the effect of electromagnetic radiation on semen parameters among males seeking infertility treatment
Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional study conducted at tertiary centre from May2024 to April2025 after ethical approval (AIIMSA1273/03.05.2024). Males between 21-42years who consulted for infertility were included. Males who were having systemic diseases, history of chemo/radiotherapy/malignancy, not willing to participate, or not able to give sample were excluded. All recruited participants were asked to fill questionnaire and followed by semen-analysis. Outcomes were effect of duration of mobile phones usage/day, effect of frequency of mobile phone use/day, position of mobile phone, internet usage/day and total duration of mobile phone use and residence proximity to telecommunication tower on semen quality. Statistical analyses were performed using Stata-16 (TX,USA).
Results:
All semen analyses were carried out according to WHO guidelines(6thEdition). Mean age of participants was 33.04 ±4.93years. According to analysis, there were significant differences among different groups of daily mobile phone use time in terms of total sperm count, total motility, progressive motility, abnormal morphology and vitality with overall p=<0.001. Bonferroni pairwise comparison showed significant differences in abnormal morphology Pa=1.00, Pb=1.00, Pc=0.001 and Pd=0.001 for <10times/day vs ≥10 to ≤20times/day, <10times vs >20 to ≤40 times/day, <10 times vs ≥40 to ≤ 60 times/day respectively. By keeping smart phones in trouser pocket, there was significant decline in morphology(p=0.001) and vitality(p= 0.004). Residence within 1Kilometer of telecommunication tower led to significant differences in abnormal morphology(p=0.005). Bonferroni pairwise comparison showed significant differences in the abnormal morphology Pa= 0.002, Pb=0.001, Pc=0.001 and Pd=0.001 for <30minutes/day vs ≥30mitutes to <1hour/day, <30minutes vs ≥1 to ≤3hours/day, <30minutes vs >3 to ≤ 6hours/day, <30minutes vs >6hours/day respectively. There were significant differences in the progressive motility(p= 0.03), head defect (p= 0.001), and vitality(p= 0.007) among four different groups of total duration of mobile phone usage in whole life.
Conclusion: We suggest that average daily cell phone use duration may affect sperm parameters. Therefore, we recommend that men should avoid prolonged usage of mobile phones for calls, message or internet, keep the device away from the groin and stay 1kilometer away from telecommunication tower to preserve their fertility.
According to International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technology (ICMART) and World Health Organization (WHO), infertility is disease characterized by inability in achieving a pregnancy after 12months of timed unprotected sexual intercourse [1]. More than 186million people worldwide suffer from infertility. Between 8-12% of couples of childbearing age are affected by infertility [1]. In 2019, global prevalence of male infertility was estimated to be 56million reflecting a substantial 76.9% increase since 1990. Regions with highest male infertility in 2019 were Western Sub-Saharan Africa, Eastern-Europe, and East-Asia. Prevalence and male infertility peaked in 30–34year age-group worldwide [2].
The rapid decline in global fertility rates in recent decades has occurred alongside decreasing sperm count and quality suggesting that decline in fertility may be due to decreasing sperm quality [3]. A systematic review examining time frame of nearly 40years, showed significant decrease in sperm concentration (113million/ml to 66million/ml) and semen volume (3.40ml to 2.75ml) over evaluated timespan [1]. Based on study in 2017; identified a significant decrease between 1980 and 2015, declining from 91.65million/ml to 39.34million/ml (r=−.313,p-0.0002). This reflected an approximate 57% abatement in sperm count worldwide since 1980 [4]. Studies have also suggested that prolonged use of mobile phones and wearing of tight underwear also impact negatively on semen parameters and DNA integrity [5].
Mechanism by which lifestyle and environmental factors reduce quality of sperms is not fully understood; however, there are studies that suggest disruption of endocrine function, aberrant DNA methylation in sperm, abnormal seminal plasma zinc levels, and morphological damage to sperms [6-8]. Recent publication has shown several genes linked to fertility, and mutations to these single genes lead to low sperm quality [9]. Phones are emitting RF-EMWs (Radiofrequency-Electromagnetic Waves) which are having thermal and non-thermal effect on spermatogenesis. Some studies have suggested that EMWs can affect membrane fluidity and ability of sperm to interact with oocyte, thereby diminishing probability of fertilisation. In addition to oxidative damage, other hypotheses include alteration of cellular metabolism and possible epigenetic modifications of spermatozoa. EMFs could affect gene expression and DNA methylation, leading to changes in sperm function [6]. However, these mechanisms require further investigation to be fully understood.
There has been significant increase in amount of time spent using different devices emitting RF-EMWs. It was interesting to note that many subfertile males were using these devices so often. Therefore, we wanted to find if there is a causal association between use of RF-EMWs devices and changes in semen parameters.
2.1 Study Design:
It was cross-sectional study conducted at tertiary centre from May 2024 till April 2025 after approval from Institutional Ethics Committee(IEC) with reference number AIIMSA1273/03.05.2024 and informed consent from participants. This study was conducted as per Helsinki Declaration. Male partners between 21-42years who consulted for infertility and planned for semen analysis were included. Males who were having systemic diseases, history of chemo/radiotherapy/malignancy, not willing to participate, or not able to give sample were excluded. All recruited participants were asked to fill questionnaire and followed by semen analysis. Subjects were enrolled after inclusion and exclusion criteria during span of 1year attending infertility clinic in tertiary center.
2.2 Semen collection and analysis:
As per table-1; semen quality was assessed using four parameters: concentration, motility and morphology, and vitality according to WHO Criteria (6th edition,2021) i.e., concentration ≥15×106/ml, total sperm count 39×106/ejaculate, total motility 42%, progressive motility ≥30%, vitality ≥54% and ≥4% of normal forms. These were accepted as normal values.
|
Table 1: Sample collection and analysis protocol
2.3 Questionnaire:
A self-designed questionnaire was used in study as per table-2. Questionnaire was completed before semen extraction, and answers were collected and reviewed by same researcher.
|
Table 2: Questionnaire for study population
2.4 Outcomes:
Primary outcome was to assess effect of duration of mobile phones usage per day on semen parameters. Secondary outcomes were to assess effect of frequency of mobile phone usage per day, mobile phone position, internet usage per day; and total duration of mobile phone usage and residence proximity to telecommunication tower on semen quality.
Statistical analyses were performed using Stata16 (Stata Corp LLC, College Station, TX, USA). Categorical variables were compared using Chi-square test or Fisher's exact test, as appropriate. Continuous variables were analyzed using one-way ANOVA for normally distributed data or Kruskal-Wallis test for non-normally distributed data, followed by post-hoc comparisons with Bonferroni test or Wilcoxon rank-sum test. P-value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. All tests were two-tailed.
All semen analyses were carried out according to WHO guidelines applicable at time of publication (WHO;2021). Figure-1 is showing flow diagram for study.
Figure 1: Flow diagram for study
4.1 Demography of Study Participants:
Total 500 men between ages of 21-42years were recruited into study. Mean age of participants was 33.04±4.93years. As shown in table-3, largest age
group was 31-35years comprising 46.20%, whereas least age group represented was 21-25 years of age 0.80%.
Age Groups (in years) | Frequency (Number) | Percentage (%) |
| 21-25 | 4 | 0.80 |
| 26-30 | 121 | 24.20 |
| 31-35 | 231 | 46.20 |
| 36-40 | 112 | 22.40 |
| 41-42 | 32 | 6.40 |
| Total | 500 | 100 |
Table 3: Age distribution of participants
4.2 Effect of daily mobile phone usage time on semen parameters:
According to analysis, there were significant differences among different groups of daily mobile phone use time in terms of total sperm count, total motility, progressive motility, abnormal morphology and vitality with
overall p-value <0.001. Bonferroni pairwise comparison showed that with increase in mobile phone usage led to progressively compromised semen quality which is shown in table-4 and figure-2.
| Parameter | Group-1 Duration <1hour> (N=71) | Group-2 Duration ≥1 To ≤3hours (N=116) | Group-3 Duration >3 To ≤ 6hours (N=64) | Group-4 Duration >6 Hours (N=249) |
Overall-p-Value | Bonferroni Group-wise comparisons | ||
| Pa | Pb | Pc | ||||||
| Total Sperm Count (TSC, X10⁶) | 244.5 ± 155.0 | 154.2 ± 75.1 | 150.6 ± 73.0 | 117.7 ± 107.5 | 0.001 | 0.990 | 0.05 | 0.001 |
| Concentration (X10⁶/ml) | 96.2 ± 65.5 | 56.6 ± 31.2 | 58.1 ± 41.7 | 47.8 ± 41.2 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Total Motility (%) | 60.3 ± 13.8 | 60.3 ± 13.0 | 52.6 ± 20.7 | 51.4 ± 17.9 | 0.001 | 1.00 | 0.05 | 0.001 |
| Progressive Motility (%) | 48.5 ± 15.5 | 48.4 ± 14.4 | 46.9 ± 18.9 | 34.1 ± 18.9 | 0.001 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.001 |
| Abnormal Morphology (%) | 83.9 ± 10.7 | 85.4 ± 15.7 | 96.5 ± 4.5 | 98.0 ± 2.2 | 0.001 | 1.00 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Head Defect (%) | 72.9 ± 25.4 | 76.0 ± 25.6 | 86.8 ± 26.8 | 94.5 ± 6.9 | 0.001 | 1.00 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Midpiece Defect (%) | 18.7 ± 18.8 | 12.1 ± 13.8 | 6.4 ± 9.0 | 20.9 ± 19.6 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.17 |
| Excess Cytoplasm Defect (%) | 2.1 ± 2.4 | 2.4 ± 3.1 | 1.3 ± 2.0 | 2.7 ± 2.9 | 0.001 | 0.37 | 0.009 | 0.09 |
| Tail Defect (%) | 10.3 ± 6.1 | 7.7 ± 6.6 | 8.8 ± 7.8 | 9.1 ± 7.7 | 0.008 | 0.001 | 0.01 | 0.03 |
| Vitality (%) | 73.7 ± 12.1 | 61.0 ± 15.3 | 46.3 ± 22.3 | 45.4 ± 17.4 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Table 4: Duration of mobile phone usage per day on semen parameters
Notes:
 Figure 2.1: Effect of duration of mobile phone use per day on TSC, total motility, progressive motility, abnormal morphology, and vitality  Figure 2.2: Effect of duration of mobile phone use per day on semen morphology |
Figure 2: Effect of duration of mobile phone use per day on semen parameters
Note: Usage of mobile phone per day (Group 1= <1 hour per day, group 2= ≥1 to ≤3 hours per day, group 3= >3 to ≤6 hours per day, group=4 ≥6 hours per day)
4.3 Effect of frequency of mobile phone use per day on semen parameters:
Table-5 and figure-3 shows that there were significant differences in semen parameters among five groups of different frequency of mobile phone use per day including total sperm count (p-value 0.001), total motility (p-value 0.001), progressive motility (p-value 0.001), abnormal morphology (p-value 0.001), and vitality (p-value 0.001). Bonferroni pairwise comparison showed significant differences in the abnormal morphology (Pa=1.00, Pb=1.00, Pc=0.001 and Pd=0.001 for <10 times per day vs ≥10 to ≤20 times per day,<10times vs >20 to ≤40 times per day,<10 times vs ≥40 to ≤ 60 times per day respectively.
| Parameter | Group-1 <10times> (N=15) | Group-2 ≥10 to ≤20 times/day (N=72) | Group-3 >20 to ≤40 times/day (N=81) | Group-4 ≥40 to ≤ 60 times/day (N=52) | Group-5 ≥60 times/day (N=280) | overall P-Value | Bonferroni groupwise comparisons | |||
| Pa | Pb | Pc | Pd | |||||||
| Total Sperm Count (X10⁶) | 332.80 ± 107.53 | 195.02 ± 120.97 | 155.85 ± 99.45 | 100.22 ± 65.34 | 133.30± 109.76 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Concentration (X10⁶/ML) | 109.00 ± 62.47 | 80.39 ± 54.79 | 55.02 ± 36.22 | 49.38 ± 43.00 | 52.06± 42.98 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Total Motility (%) | 64.00 ± 19.97 | 59.57 ± 13.42 | 60.90 ± 11.95 | 51.71 ± 16.38 | 52.03± 18.60 | 0.001 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.13 | 0.07 |
| Progressive Motility (%) | 56.80 ± 17.18 | 46.19 ± 15.83 | 46.54 ± 16.35 | 43.15 ± 18.68 | 36.99± 19.13 | 0.001 | 0.41 | 0.45 | 0.10 | 0.001 |
| Abnormal Morphology (%) | 85.6±9.56 | 82.43 ± 12.14 | 85.58 ± 17.30 | 95.81 ± 4.82 | 97.56±2.68 | 0.001 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Head Defect (%) | 71.20 ± 32.91 | 69.21 ± 26.12 | 78.68 ± 25.24 | 87.25 ± 22.28 | 93.26±11.45 | 0.001 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.03 | 0.001 |
| Midpiece Defect (%) | 14.00 ± 17.12 | 12.36 ± 14.04 | 19.79 ± 18.71 | 13.25 ± 18.83 | 17.70±18.30 | 0.04 | 0.65 | 0.056 | 0.789 | 0.234 |
| Excess Cytoplasm Defect (%) | 0.80 ± 1.21 | 1.74 ± 2.14 | 3.21 ± 2.97 | 3.02 ± 4.00 | 2.29±2.67 | 0.001 | 0.23 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.04 |
| Tail Defect (%) | 13.60 ± 7.31 | 9.40 ± 6.79 | 8.16 ± 5.50 | 8.87 ± 6.83 | 8.77±7.86 | 0.11 | 0.09 | 0.05 | 0.10 | 0.09 |
| Vitality (%) | 77.20 ± 11.59 | 71.96 ± 15.43 | 57.30 ± 14.45 | 44.90 ± 22.23 | 47.36±17.92 | 0.001 | 1.00 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Notes:
 Figure 3.1: Effect of frequency of mobile phone usage per day on TSC, total motility, progressive motility, abnormal morphology, and vitality  Figure 3.2: Effect of frequency of mobile phone usage per day on semen morphology |
Figure 3: Effect of frequency of mobile phone use per day on semen parameters
Note: Frequency of mobilephone use per day; group 1= <10 times per day, group 2= ≥10 to ≤20 times per day, group 3= >20 to ≤40 times per day, group =4 >40 to ≤ 60 times per day, group 5= >60 times per day
4.4 Effect of mobile phone position on semen parameters:
As shown in table-6 and figure-4, there were significant differences in abnormal morphology (p-value 0.001) and vitality (p-value 0.004) when phones were kept in trouser pocket.
Parameters | Group-1 Trouser Pocket N=412 | Group-2 Shirt Pocket N=10 | Group-3 Not In Touch with Body N=78 | p-value | Bonferroni groupwise comparisons | |
| Pa | Pb | |||||
| Total Sperm Count (X106) | 144.96± 111.48 | 225.38± 180.86 | 156.63± 111.38 | 0.25 | 0.07 | 0.18 |
| Concentration (X106/ml) | 56.37± 43.12 | 85.40± 73.49 | 63.42± 56.77 | 0.50 | 0.12 | 0.42 |
| Total Motility (%) | 55.83± 17.10 | 61.80± 17.33 | 48.92± 16.94 | 0.002 | 0.82 | 0.003 |
| Progressive Motility (%) | 40.94± 18.89 | 51.60± 15.15 | 40.59± 18.48 | 0.68 | 0.22 | 1.00 |
| Abnormal Morphology (%) | 93.94± 9.80 | 82.00± 11.37 | 88.78± 13.89 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Head Defect (%) | 87.04± 20.27 | 79.60± 8.96 | 82.27± 24.91 | 0.001 | 0.80 | 0.20 |
| Midpiece Defect (%) | 17.58± 18.63 | 15.20± 16.32 | 12.23± 13.40 | 0.03 | 0.32 | 0.004 |
| Excess Cytoplasm Defect(%) | 2.28± 2.71 | 4.40± 2.95 | 2.71± 3.35 | 0.02 | 0.004 | 0.18 |
| Tail Defect (%) | 9.29± 7.57 | 8.60± 2.46 | 6.96± 5.71 | 0.01 | 0.33 | 0.001 |
| Vitality (%) | 52.69± 19.00 | 71.40± 13.13 | 53.23± 24.28 | 0.004 | 0.01 | 1.00 |
Table 6: Effect of position of mobile phone on semen parameters
Figure 4: Effect Of Position of Mobile Phone on Semen Parameters
Note: Position Of Mobile Phone (Group 1= Trouser pocket, group 2= shirt pocket, group 3= not in touch with body)
4.5 Effect of proximity to telecommunication tower on semen parameters:
As shown in table-7, there were no differences among groups in the sperm concentration, total sperm number, total motility, progressive sperm motility, or vitality (p-value >0.05). However, there were significant differences in abnormal morphology (p-value 0.005) when residences were within 1kilometer to telecommunication tower.
| Parameter | Group-1 <1> N=78 | Group-2 ≥1 kilometer N=422 |
P-Value |
| Total Sperm Count (X106) | 126.76± 84.05 | 152.38± 117.77 | 0.37 |
| Concentration (X106/ml) | 54.78± 33.13 | 58.65± 48.41 | 0.55 |
| Total Motility (%) | 54.28± 18.64 | 54.99± 17.01 | 0.74 |
| Progressive Motility (%) | 38.92± 18.78 | 41.50± 18.78 | 0.26 |
| Abnormal Morphology (%) | 96.78± 4.34 | 92.18± 11.49 | 0.005 |
| Head Defect (%) | 87.18± 23.87 | 85.96± 20.40 | 0.63 |
| Midpiece Defect (%) | 20.09± 22.20 | 16.07± 17.00 | 0.16 |
| Excess Cytoplasm Defect(%) | 2.31± 2.66 | 2.41± 2.87 | 0.89 |
| Tail Defect (%) | 7.99± 5.83 | 9.09± 7.51 | 0.26 |
| Vitality (%) | 53.37± 20.16 | 53.11± 19.94 | 0.91 |
Table 7: Effect of proximity to telecommunication tower on semen parameters
Notes: Values are presented as Mean ± SD, rounded to two decimal places
4.6 Effect of internet usage on semen parameters:
Table-8 and figure-5 shows that there were significant differences in semen parameters among groups of different internet use/day including total sperm count (p-value 0.001), total motility (p-value 0.001), progressive motility (p-value 0.001), abnormal morphology (p-value 0.001), and vitality (p-value 0.001). Bonferroni pairwise comparison showed significant differences in the abnormal morphology Pa= 0.002, Pb=0.001, Pc=0.001 and Pd=0.001 for <30minutes/day vs ≥30mitutes to <1hour/day, <30minutes vs ≥1 to ≤3hours/day, <30minutes vs >3 to ≤ 6hours/day, <30minutes vs >6hours/day respectively.
| Parameters | Group-1 <30minutes> (N=40) | Group-2 ≥30min To <1hour> (N=128) | Group-3 ≥1 To ≤3hours (N=63) | Group-4 >3 To ≤ 6hours (N=62) | Group-5 >6 Hours (N=207) | Overall P-Value |
Bonferroni Groupwise Comparisons | |||
| Pa | Pb | Pc | Pd | |||||||
| Total Sperm Count (X10^6) | 243.05 ± 126.89 | 170.94 ± 116.64 | 158.08 ± 73.07 | 129.29 ± 114.36 | 118.92 ± 105.90 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.005 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Concentration (X10^6/Ml) | 85.05 ± 59.80 | 70.40 ± 50.92 | 54.13 ± 32.54 | 48.31 ± 40.46 | 49.30 ± 42.17 | 0.001 | 0.086 | 0.005 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Total Motility (%) | 55.40 ± 17.92 | 60.35 ± 12.36 | 53.29 ± 21.77 | 57.60 ± 17.83 | 51.06 ± 17.12 | 0.001 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| Progressive Motility (%) | 44.98 ± 22.20 | 49.28 ± 11.59 | 43.29 ± 20.57 | 47.32 ± 19.57 | 32.75 ± 17.62 | 0.001 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.001 |
| Non-Progressive Motility (%) | 10.88 ± 11.59 | 11.09 ± 10.75 | 9.33 ± 10.82 | 8.56 ± 8.55 | 18.33 ± 15.74 | 0.001 | 0.17 | 0.33 | 0.37 | 0.003 |
| Abnormal Morphology (%) | 81.85 ± 11.52 | 88.20 ± 10.48 | 89.24 ± 18.87 | 97.53 ± 4.33 | 97.66 ± 2.72 | 0.001 | 0.002 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Head Defect (%) | 66.20 ± 31.40 | 82.03 ± 19.06 | 80.43 ± 27.84 | 92.03 ± 20.28 | 92.53 ± 12.23 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.003 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Midpiece Defect (%) | 10.58 ± 12.05 | 17.37 ± 17.52 | 5.24 ± 7.35 | 13.06 ± 13.44 | 22.03 ± 20.33 | 0.001 | 0.10 | 0.004 | 0.14 | 0.001 |
| Excess Cytoplasm Defect (%) | 0.80 ± 1.84 | 2.74 ± 3.08 | 1.67 ± 2.12 | 2.94 ± 3.38 | 2.54 ± 2.71 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.007 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Tail Defect (%) | 8.98 ± 6.24 | 8.41 ± 5.98 | 7.83 ± 8.20 | 9.85 ± 6.72 | 9.27 ± 8.03 | 0.89 | 0.31 | 0.034 | 0.28 | 0.47 |
| Vitality (%) | 74.88 ± 18.06 | 62.16 ± 16.73 | 48.63 ± 19.93 | 44.13 ± 17.90 | 47.46 ± 17.63 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Table 8: Effect of internet usage on semen parameters
Figure 5.1: Effect of internet usage per day on TSC, total motility, progressive motility, abnormal morphology, and vitality  Figure 5.2: Effect of internet usage per day on semen morphology |
Figure 5: Effect of internet usage per day on semen quality
Note: Internet usage per day (group 1= <30 minutes per day, group =2 <30 minutes per day to ≥1 hour per day, group 3= ≥1 to ≤3 hours per day, group 4= >3 to ≤6 hours per day, group5= ≥6 hours per day)
4.7 Effect of total duration of mobile phone usage on semen parameters:
Table-9 shows that there were significant differences in semen parameters among groups of different total duration of mobile phone usage in life in terms of progressive motility (p-value 0.03), head defect (p-value 0.001), and vitality (p-value 0.007).
| Parameters | Group 1 <10years> (N=43) | Group 2 ≥10years to <20years> (N=409) | Group 3 ≥20years to <30years> (N=21) | Group 4 ≥30years (N=27) | overall p-Value | Bonferroni groupwise comparisons | ||
| Pa | Pb | Pc | ||||||
| Total Sperm Count (X10^6) | 156.07 ± 113.47 | 147.43 ± 115.51 | 149.50 ± 83.14 | 149.78± 107.56 | 0.08 | 0.23 | 0.30 | 0.40 |
| Concentration (X10^6/ml) | 52.30 ± 39.97 | 59.05 ± 48.02 | 64.48 ± 38.03 | 47.00 ± 33.53 | 0.93 | 0.17 | 0.06 | 0.44 |
| Total Motility (%) | 50.14 ± 24.14 | 55.26 ± 15.99 | 59.14 ± 19.19 | 53.33 ± 20.48 | 0.18 | 0.38 | 0.30 | 1.00 |
| Progressive Motility (%) | 33.53 ± 22.39 | 42.03 ± 17.66 | 43.19 ± 22.09 | 37.33 ± 23.87 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.31 | 1.00 |
| Abnormal Morphology (%) | 90.09 ± 9.51 | 93.10 ± 11.14 | 93.05 ± 8.50 | 94.22 ± 9.04 | 0.33 | 0.50 | 1.00 | 0.72 |
| Head Defect (%) | 76.42 ± 29.67 | 87.65 ± 18.35 | 70.95 ± 39.70 | 90.67 ± 10.70 | 0.001 | 0.004 | 1.00 | 0.03 |
| Midpiece Defect (%) | 19.47 ± 13.15 | 16.26 ± 18.63 | 19.00 ± 15.62 | 17.11 ± 15.71 | 0.65 | 0.01 | 0.37 | 0.24 |
| Excess Cytoplasm Defect (%) | 2.40 ± 2.99 | 2.40 ± 2.80 | 1.81 ± 2.11 | 2.67 ± 3.53 | 0.76 | 0.31 | 0.32 | 0.47 |
| Tail Defect (%) | 9.81 ± 5.50 | 8.70 ± 7.54 | 10.52 ± 5.50 | 9.44 ± 7.00 | 0.54 | 0.03 | 0.33 | 0.25 |
| Vitality (%) | 61.02 ± 25.68 | 52.14 ± 18.51 | 61.10 ± 24.76 | 49.78 ± 23.45 | 0.007 | 0.03 | 1.00 | 0.13 |
Table 9: Effect of total duration of mobile phone use on semen parameters
Recently, an increasing number of mobile phone users as mobile phones have become an important part of everyday life. Although many researchers have investigated the effect of mobile phone usage, results have been inconsistent. RF-EMWs which are emitted from mobile phones have mainly two types of mechanisms to affects sperm quality. First, thermal effect; which could increase intensity of heat near testis and outer gonadal organs, thereby damaging sperm production [7]. Second, non-thermal radiation effect which affect sperm quality by producing reactive oxygen species (ROS). ROS attack nuclear DNA of spermatozoa, causing impaired mitochondrial electron transport chain and isocitrate dehydrogenase activity [8]. Alternatively, RF-EMWs could act indirectly on semen quality by altering endocrine status of men like disrupting hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal axis. Hence EMWs are not good for human spermatogenesis. For assessing exposure from transmitters located near body, most useful quantity is specific absorption rate (SAR). In India SAR limit is fixed at 1.6w/kg [10].
5.1 Effect of daily mobile phone usage time on semen parameters:
We found that most of comparisons of four sperm parameters: sperm count, motility, viability, and abnormal morphology between all cell phone user groups were significantly different. Out of 500 participants, 49.8% participant used mobile phone >6hours/day. This led us to suggest that use of phones may adversely affect quality of semen by decreasing sperm counts, motility, viability, and morphology which contribute to infertility. During detailed analysis, we found that with increasing duration of mobile usage from 1hour to >6hours/day, there is significant decline in quality with overall p-value <0.001. Similar results were found in few previous studies [3,11-13]. Similar results were found by Agarwal et.al. in 2008 [11]. Another study by Zilberlicht et.al. found that talking for ≥1hours/day and during device charging were associated with abnormal semen concentration (p-value< 0.04 and p-value<0.02, respectively) [14].
Zhang et. al. in 2022 conducted similar study on daily mobile phone usage (<2hours/day, 2–4hours/day, 4–6hours/day and >6hours/day); found that significant associations among different groups of daily mobile phone use time and calls in terms of progressively motility and total motility [13]. Present study results are in accordance with these authors, although we found that not only motility but also sperm count, viability, and morphology are negatively affected by phones usage. Till now there are two meta-analysis on effect of mobile phone usage on semen parameters, earliest conducted in 2014 by Adams el.at. on 1492 men and concluded that exposure to mobile phones was associated with reduced sperm motility (mean difference−8.1%(95%CI−13.1,−3.2) and viability (mean difference−9.1%(95%CI−18.4,0.2), with equivocal effects on concentration [15]. Consistent with results of previous meta-analysis, another meta-analysis came in 2021 by Kim et.al.; included 4280 men and found that overall decline in semen quality with use of mobile phone use but not statistically significant [16]. Another meta-analysis on animals studies; have identified histopathological alterations in testicular tissue caused by phone radiation, such as reduced seminiferous tubule diameter, tunica albuginea and germinal epithelial thickness, leydig cell hypoplasia, and increased intertubular space. Consistent exposure to phone radiation has been shown to significantly reduce sperm count, motility, and viability while also increasing abnormal sperm morphology in male rats, mice and rabbits [17]. However, a few other researchers derived at results discordant to this study. Amin et al. found statistically insignificant inverse correlation between time spent on phone in hours (<2hours or >2hours) with sperm concentration and motility [10]. Similarly Al Bayyari et.al. found that there is decline in semen quality in terms of sperm concentration, volume, viscosity, motility and abnormal morphology but not significant p-value >0.05 [18].
5.2 Effect of frequency of mobile phone use per day on semen parameters:
In our study we found that there were significant differences in semen parameters among groups of different frequency of mobile phone usage per day in terms of total sperm count, progressive motility, abnormal morphology, and vitality with overall p-value 0.001. On groups comparison, there was significant differences in semen quality when mobile phone was more than 40 times per day with p-value 0.001. Similar study was performed by Rahban et.al. in 2023 on 2759 participants; found higher frequency of mobile phone use (>20times/day) was associated with 30% and 21% increased risk for sperm concentration and total sperm count to be below WHO references, respectively. Assessing frequency of mobile phone usage is more valid to check effect of mobile phones as it is surrogate of RF-EMWs energy absorbed from mobile phones. Energy absorbed by body depends mainly on transmission duration, source’s strength, and distance to source [19].
5.3 Effect of mobile phone position on semen parameters:
In our study, when mobile phones were kept in pocket, there was statistically significant decline in semen quality in terms abnormal morphology (p-value 0.001) and vitality (p-value 0.004). These changes can be explained by thermal effect of RF-EMWs devices. The rise of 0.5degree Celsius temperature is noticed in groins when phones are kept in trouser pockets which is directly impairing spermatogenesis [20]. Zilberlicht et.al. found that among men who reported holding their phones ≤50cm from groin, a non-significantly higher rate of abnormal sperm concentration was found (47.1%vs11.1%) [14]. Al Bayyari et.al. found carrying mobile phone in trouser pocket was significantly associated with increasing means of immotile sperms [18]. However, a few other researchers derived at contradictory findings to our study as keeping a mobile phone in trouser pocket was not found to be associated with lower semen parameters [10,13,19]. Blay et.al. in 2020 conducted study involving 80 healthy adult found that active sperm motility and viability showed significant increase (p-value 0.002 and 0.009) in participants who kept phone in side pocket. The contradictory results may be due to huge disparity in the percentage of participants that stored mobile phones in side pockets (85%) compared to other places [3].
5.4 Effect Of Total Duration Of Mobile Phone Use On Semen Parameters:
In our study, there was a significant effect of total duration of mobile phone on progressive motility (p-value 0.03), head defect (p-value 0.001), and vitality (p-value 0.007) . But, these findings were not following any order. These results may be due to huge disparity in percentage of participants (81.80%) used mobile phone for 10-20years. Similar results were found in one more study by Amin et al as slight reduction in normal morphology over 5years duration but not significant [10].
5.5 Effect Of Internet Used On Semen Parameters:
In this study, there was a significant decline in semen quality with internet usage per day in terms of total sperm count (p-value 0.001), progressive motility (p-value 0.001), abnormal morphology (p-value 0.001), and vitality (p-value 0.001). We observed a trend indicating that increased internet usage duration is linked to reduced semen quality. There are a few studies performed on usage of internet like in 2015 by Yildirim et.al. found negative correlation between wireless internet usage duration and total sperm count (p-value 0.032) and motility (p-value 0.033) [21]. Even though there are some studies performed on effects of RF-EMW and cell phones on male fertility, there is not so much scientific data about the association between Wi-Fi internet usage and male fertility. Moreover, in an in-vitro study performed with motile spermatozoa from 29 healthy donors, according to results of this study; Wi-Fi showed significant decrease in progressive sperm motility and an increase in sperm DNA fragmentation [22].
5.6 Effect of Proximity to Telecommunication Tower on Semen Parameters:
In this study we noticed significant decline in semen quality in form of abnormal morphology (p-value 0.005) in participants who stayed within 1kilometer of telecommunication tower. Contradictory to our study, Amin et.al. could not find any significant effect on semen quality by telecommunication tower within 1km proximity of their domicile in 11%(16 cases) [10]. Hence, to confirm these effects more studies need to be performed. However, some jurisdictions have already prohibited placement of phone towers near schools or hospitals, as in India [23] and placement of base stations should be kept as far away as possible to minimize exposure of public to RFWs and it should not be located less than 500meter from population, and at a height of 50meter [24].
It is a single centre study which was conducted on the male partner of couples attending infertility clinic. Hence, possibility of cross-over with some element of male subfertility is already there. Another limitation was that there was no consistency with use of networks among participants as they were switching network (2G/3G/4G/5G) as dose radiation varies. Last limitation was that there can be recall bias as it was questionnaire based study. Therefore, a follow-up large multicentric studies are needed to exclude regional and ethnic variations and to validate findings of study.
In conclusion, we suggest that average daily cell phone use duration may affect sperm parameters. Therefore, we recommend that men should avoid prolonged usage of mobile phones for calls, message or internet, keep device away from groin and stay 1kilometer away from telecommunication tower to preserve their fertility. In addition, more well-designed multicentre cross-sectional investigations and mechanistic studies are needed in future to clarify effects of RF-EMW produced by phones on male semen quality.
Conflict of interest: None.
Human rights statement and informed consent: All patients were well informed and written informed consent was obtained prior to the treatment period.
The statement of approval from Institutional Review Board: All procedures in this study were in accordance with the ethical standards of the Ethical Committee in accordance with the ethical principles that have their origin in the Declaration of Helsinki 1964 and its later amendments. This study was approved by Institutional Ethics Committee(IEC) with reference number AIIMSA1273/03.05.2024
Authorship contribution statement:
The study was conceptualized by NS and N. and designed by NS, N. and SK. N. and RR were responsible for obtaining clinical data and informed consent. NS and N. were responsible for protocol implementation. NS supervised the overall study. AU, NS and N. analyzed and interpreted the data. N. and NS drafted the first manuscript. SK, RR, N. and NS were responsible for critically editing the manuscript. All authors contributed to the patient management and follow-up. All authors contributed to manuscript writing and critical evaluation of the final manuscript.
Financial support and sponsorship: None
Data Availability statement: The data set used in the current study is available on request from the corresponding author.
Clearly Auctoresonline and particularly Psychology and Mental Health Care Journal is dedicated to improving health care services for individuals and populations. The editorial boards' ability to efficiently recognize and share the global importance of health literacy with a variety of stakeholders. Auctoresonline publishing platform can be used to facilitate of optimal client-based services and should be added to health care professionals' repertoire of evidence-based health care resources.
Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Intervention The submission and review process was adequate. However I think that the publication total value should have been enlightened in early fases. Thank you for all.
Journal of Women Health Care and Issues By the present mail, I want to say thank to you and tour colleagues for facilitating my published article. Specially thank you for the peer review process, support from the editorial office. I appreciate positively the quality of your journal.
Journal of Clinical Research and Reports I would be very delighted to submit my testimonial regarding the reviewer board and the editorial office. The reviewer board were accurate and helpful regarding any modifications for my manuscript. And the editorial office were very helpful and supportive in contacting and monitoring with any update and offering help. It was my pleasure to contribute with your promising Journal and I am looking forward for more collaboration.
We would like to thank the Journal of Thoracic Disease and Cardiothoracic Surgery because of the services they provided us for our articles. The peer-review process was done in a very excellent time manner, and the opinions of the reviewers helped us to improve our manuscript further. The editorial office had an outstanding correspondence with us and guided us in many ways. During a hard time of the pandemic that is affecting every one of us tremendously, the editorial office helped us make everything easier for publishing scientific work. Hope for a more scientific relationship with your Journal.
The peer-review process which consisted high quality queries on the paper. I did answer six reviewers’ questions and comments before the paper was accepted. The support from the editorial office is excellent.
Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. I had the experience of publishing a research article recently. The whole process was simple from submission to publication. The reviewers made specific and valuable recommendations and corrections that improved the quality of my publication. I strongly recommend this Journal.
Dr. Katarzyna Byczkowska My testimonial covering: "The peer review process is quick and effective. The support from the editorial office is very professional and friendly. Quality of the Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on cardiology that is useful for other professionals in the field.
Thank you most sincerely, with regard to the support you have given in relation to the reviewing process and the processing of my article entitled "Large Cell Neuroendocrine Carcinoma of The Prostate Gland: A Review and Update" for publication in your esteemed Journal, Journal of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics". The editorial team has been very supportive.
Testimony of Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology: work with your Reviews has been a educational and constructive experience. The editorial office were very helpful and supportive. It was a pleasure to contribute to your Journal.
Dr. Bernard Terkimbi Utoo, I am happy to publish my scientific work in Journal of Women Health Care and Issues (JWHCI). The manuscript submission was seamless and peer review process was top notch. I was amazed that 4 reviewers worked on the manuscript which made it a highly technical, standard and excellent quality paper. I appreciate the format and consideration for the APC as well as the speed of publication. It is my pleasure to continue with this scientific relationship with the esteem JWHCI.
This is an acknowledgment for peer reviewers, editorial board of Journal of Clinical Research and Reports. They show a lot of consideration for us as publishers for our research article “Evaluation of the different factors associated with side effects of COVID-19 vaccination on medical students, Mutah university, Al-Karak, Jordan”, in a very professional and easy way. This journal is one of outstanding medical journal.
Dear Hao Jiang, to Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing We greatly appreciate the efficient, professional and rapid processing of our paper by your team. If there is anything else we should do, please do not hesitate to let us know. On behalf of my co-authors, we would like to express our great appreciation to editor and reviewers.
As an author who has recently published in the journal "Brain and Neurological Disorders". I am delighted to provide a testimonial on the peer review process, editorial office support, and the overall quality of the journal. The peer review process at Brain and Neurological Disorders is rigorous and meticulous, ensuring that only high-quality, evidence-based research is published. The reviewers are experts in their fields, and their comments and suggestions were constructive and helped improve the quality of my manuscript. The review process was timely and efficient, with clear communication from the editorial office at each stage. The support from the editorial office was exceptional throughout the entire process. The editorial staff was responsive, professional, and always willing to help. They provided valuable guidance on formatting, structure, and ethical considerations, making the submission process seamless. Moreover, they kept me informed about the status of my manuscript and provided timely updates, which made the process less stressful. The journal Brain and Neurological Disorders is of the highest quality, with a strong focus on publishing cutting-edge research in the field of neurology. The articles published in this journal are well-researched, rigorously peer-reviewed, and written by experts in the field. The journal maintains high standards, ensuring that readers are provided with the most up-to-date and reliable information on brain and neurological disorders. In conclusion, I had a wonderful experience publishing in Brain and Neurological Disorders. The peer review process was thorough, the editorial office provided exceptional support, and the journal's quality is second to none. I would highly recommend this journal to any researcher working in the field of neurology and brain disorders.
Dear Agrippa Hilda, Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery, Editorial Coordinator, I trust this message finds you well. I want to extend my appreciation for considering my article for publication in your esteemed journal. I am pleased to provide a testimonial regarding the peer review process and the support received from your editorial office. The peer review process for my paper was carried out in a highly professional and thorough manner. The feedback and comments provided by the authors were constructive and very useful in improving the quality of the manuscript. This rigorous assessment process undoubtedly contributes to the high standards maintained by your journal.
International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. I strongly recommend to consider submitting your work to this high-quality journal. The support and availability of the Editorial staff is outstanding and the review process was both efficient and rigorous.
Thank you very much for publishing my Research Article titled “Comparing Treatment Outcome Of Allergic Rhinitis Patients After Using Fluticasone Nasal Spray And Nasal Douching" in the Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology. As Medical Professionals we are immensely benefited from study of various informative Articles and Papers published in this high quality Journal. I look forward to enriching my knowledge by regular study of the Journal and contribute my future work in the field of ENT through the Journal for use by the medical fraternity. The support from the Editorial office was excellent and very prompt. I also welcome the comments received from the readers of my Research Article.
Dear Erica Kelsey, Editorial Coordinator of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics Our team is very satisfied with the processing of our paper by your journal. That was fast, efficient, rigorous, but without unnecessary complications. We appreciated the very short time between the submission of the paper and its publication on line on your site.
I am very glad to say that the peer review process is very successful and fast and support from the Editorial Office. Therefore, I would like to continue our scientific relationship for a long time. And I especially thank you for your kindly attention towards my article. Have a good day!
"We recently published an article entitled “Influence of beta-Cyclodextrins upon the Degradation of Carbofuran Derivatives under Alkaline Conditions" in the Journal of “Pesticides and Biofertilizers” to show that the cyclodextrins protect the carbamates increasing their half-life time in the presence of basic conditions This will be very helpful to understand carbofuran behaviour in the analytical, agro-environmental and food areas. We greatly appreciated the interaction with the editor and the editorial team; we were particularly well accompanied during the course of the revision process, since all various steps towards publication were short and without delay".
I would like to express my gratitude towards you process of article review and submission. I found this to be very fair and expedient. Your follow up has been excellent. I have many publications in national and international journal and your process has been one of the best so far. Keep up the great work.
We are grateful for this opportunity to provide a glowing recommendation to the Journal of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy. We found that the editorial team were very supportive, helpful, kept us abreast of timelines and over all very professional in nature. The peer review process was rigorous, efficient and constructive that really enhanced our article submission. The experience with this journal remains one of our best ever and we look forward to providing future submissions in the near future.
I am very pleased to serve as EBM of the journal, I hope many years of my experience in stem cells can help the journal from one way or another. As we know, stem cells hold great potential for regenerative medicine, which are mostly used to promote the repair response of diseased, dysfunctional or injured tissue using stem cells or their derivatives. I think Stem Cell Research and Therapeutics International is a great platform to publish and share the understanding towards the biology and translational or clinical application of stem cells.
I would like to give my testimony in the support I have got by the peer review process and to support the editorial office where they were of asset to support young author like me to be encouraged to publish their work in your respected journal and globalize and share knowledge across the globe. I really give my great gratitude to your journal and the peer review including the editorial office.
I am delighted to publish our manuscript entitled "A Perspective on Cocaine Induced Stroke - Its Mechanisms and Management" in the Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. The peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal are excellent. The manuscripts published are of high quality and of excellent scientific value. I recommend this journal very much to colleagues.
Dr.Tania Muñoz, My experience as researcher and author of a review article in The Journal Clinical Cardiology and Interventions has been very enriching and stimulating. The editorial team is excellent, performs its work with absolute responsibility and delivery. They are proactive, dynamic and receptive to all proposals. Supporting at all times the vast universe of authors who choose them as an option for publication. The team of review specialists, members of the editorial board, are brilliant professionals, with remarkable performance in medical research and scientific methodology. Together they form a frontline team that consolidates the JCCI as a magnificent option for the publication and review of high-level medical articles and broad collective interest. I am honored to be able to share my review article and open to receive all your comments.
“The peer review process of JPMHC is quick and effective. Authors are benefited by good and professional reviewers with huge experience in the field of psychology and mental health. The support from the editorial office is very professional. People to contact to are friendly and happy to help and assist any query authors might have. Quality of the Journal is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on mental health that is useful for other professionals in the field”.
Dear editorial department: On behalf of our team, I hereby certify the reliability and superiority of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews in the peer review process, editorial support, and journal quality. Firstly, the peer review process of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is rigorous, fair, transparent, fast, and of high quality. The editorial department invites experts from relevant fields as anonymous reviewers to review all submitted manuscripts. These experts have rich academic backgrounds and experience, and can accurately evaluate the academic quality, originality, and suitability of manuscripts. The editorial department is committed to ensuring the rigor of the peer review process, while also making every effort to ensure a fast review cycle to meet the needs of authors and the academic community. Secondly, the editorial team of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is composed of a group of senior scholars and professionals with rich experience and professional knowledge in related fields. The editorial department is committed to assisting authors in improving their manuscripts, ensuring their academic accuracy, clarity, and completeness. Editors actively collaborate with authors, providing useful suggestions and feedback to promote the improvement and development of the manuscript. We believe that the support of the editorial department is one of the key factors in ensuring the quality of the journal. Finally, the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is renowned for its high- quality articles and strict academic standards. The editorial department is committed to publishing innovative and academically valuable research results to promote the development and progress of related fields. The International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is reasonably priced and ensures excellent service and quality ratio, allowing authors to obtain high-level academic publishing opportunities in an affordable manner. I hereby solemnly declare that the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews has a high level of credibility and superiority in terms of peer review process, editorial support, reasonable fees, and journal quality. Sincerely, Rui Tao.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions I testity the covering of the peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, we deeply appreciate the interest shown in our work and its publication. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you. The peer review process, as well as the support provided by the editorial office, have been exceptional, and the quality of the journal is very high, which was a determining factor in our decision to publish with you.
The peer reviewers process is quick and effective, the supports from editorial office is excellent, the quality of journal is high. I would like to collabroate with Internatioanl journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews journal clinically in the future time.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I would like to express my sincerest gratitude for the trust placed in our team for the publication in your journal. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you on this project. I am pleased to inform you that both the peer review process and the attention from the editorial coordination have been excellent. Your team has worked with dedication and professionalism to ensure that your publication meets the highest standards of quality. We are confident that this collaboration will result in mutual success, and we are eager to see the fruits of this shared effort.
Dear Dr. Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator 0f Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I hope this message finds you well. I want to express my utmost gratitude for your excellent work and for the dedication and speed in the publication process of my article titled "Navigating Innovation: Qualitative Insights on Using Technology for Health Education in Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients." I am very satisfied with the peer review process, the support from the editorial office, and the quality of the journal. I hope we can maintain our scientific relationship in the long term.
Dear Monica Gissare, - Editorial Coordinator of Nutrition and Food Processing. ¨My testimony with you is truly professional, with a positive response regarding the follow-up of the article and its review, you took into account my qualities and the importance of the topic¨.
Dear Dr. Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator 0f Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, The review process for the article “The Handling of Anti-aggregants and Anticoagulants in the Oncologic Heart Patient Submitted to Surgery” was extremely rigorous and detailed. From the initial submission to the final acceptance, the editorial team at the “Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions” demonstrated a high level of professionalism and dedication. The reviewers provided constructive and detailed feedback, which was essential for improving the quality of our work. Communication was always clear and efficient, ensuring that all our questions were promptly addressed. The quality of the “Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions” is undeniable. It is a peer-reviewed, open-access publication dedicated exclusively to disseminating high-quality research in the field of clinical cardiology and cardiovascular interventions. The journal's impact factor is currently under evaluation, and it is indexed in reputable databases, which further reinforces its credibility and relevance in the scientific field. I highly recommend this journal to researchers looking for a reputable platform to publish their studies.
Dear Editorial Coordinator of the Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing! "I would like to thank the Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing for including and publishing my article. The peer review process was very quick, movement and precise. The Editorial Board has done an extremely conscientious job with much help, valuable comments and advices. I find the journal very valuable from a professional point of view, thank you very much for allowing me to be part of it and I would like to participate in the future!”
Dealing with The Journal of Neurology and Neurological Surgery was very smooth and comprehensive. The office staff took time to address my needs and the response from editors and the office was prompt and fair. I certainly hope to publish with this journal again.Their professionalism is apparent and more than satisfactory. Susan Weiner
My Testimonial Covering as fellowing: Lin-Show Chin. The peer reviewers process is quick and effective, the supports from editorial office is excellent, the quality of journal is high. I would like to collabroate with Internatioanl journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews.
My experience publishing in Psychology and Mental Health Care was exceptional. The peer review process was rigorous and constructive, with reviewers providing valuable insights that helped enhance the quality of our work. The editorial team was highly supportive and responsive, making the submission process smooth and efficient. The journal's commitment to high standards and academic rigor makes it a respected platform for quality research. I am grateful for the opportunity to publish in such a reputable journal.
My experience publishing in International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews was exceptional. I Come forth to Provide a Testimonial Covering the Peer Review Process and the editorial office for the Professional and Impartial Evaluation of the Manuscript.
I would like to offer my testimony in the support. I have received through the peer review process and support the editorial office where they are to support young authors like me, encourage them to publish their work in your esteemed journals, and globalize and share knowledge globally. I really appreciate your journal, peer review, and editorial office.
Dear Agrippa Hilda- Editorial Coordinator of Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery, "The peer review process was very quick and of high quality, which can also be seen in the articles in the journal. The collaboration with the editorial office was very good."
I would like to express my sincere gratitude for the support and efficiency provided by the editorial office throughout the publication process of my article, “Delayed Vulvar Metastases from Rectal Carcinoma: A Case Report.” I greatly appreciate the assistance and guidance I received from your team, which made the entire process smooth and efficient. The peer review process was thorough and constructive, contributing to the overall quality of the final article. I am very grateful for the high level of professionalism and commitment shown by the editorial staff, and I look forward to maintaining a long-term collaboration with the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews.
To Dear Erin Aust, I would like to express my heartfelt appreciation for the opportunity to have my work published in this esteemed journal. The entire publication process was smooth and well-organized, and I am extremely satisfied with the final result. The Editorial Team demonstrated the utmost professionalism, providing prompt and insightful feedback throughout the review process. Their clear communication and constructive suggestions were invaluable in enhancing my manuscript, and their meticulous attention to detail and dedication to quality are truly commendable. Additionally, the support from the Editorial Office was exceptional. From the initial submission to the final publication, I was guided through every step of the process with great care and professionalism. The team's responsiveness and assistance made the entire experience both easy and stress-free. I am also deeply impressed by the quality and reputation of the journal. It is an honor to have my research featured in such a respected publication, and I am confident that it will make a meaningful contribution to the field.
"I am grateful for the opportunity of contributing to [International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews] and for the rigorous review process that enhances the quality of research published in your esteemed journal. I sincerely appreciate the time and effort of your team who have dedicatedly helped me in improvising changes and modifying my manuscript. The insightful comments and constructive feedback provided have been invaluable in refining and strengthening my work".
I thank the ‘Journal of Clinical Research and Reports’ for accepting this article for publication. This is a rigorously peer reviewed journal which is on all major global scientific data bases. I note the review process was prompt, thorough and professionally critical. It gave us an insight into a number of important scientific/statistical issues. The review prompted us to review the relevant literature again and look at the limitations of the study. The peer reviewers were open, clear in the instructions and the editorial team was very prompt in their communication. This journal certainly publishes quality research articles. I would recommend the journal for any future publications.
Dear Jessica Magne, with gratitude for the joint work. Fast process of receiving and processing the submitted scientific materials in “Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions”. High level of competence of the editors with clear and correct recommendations and ideas for enriching the article.
We found the peer review process quick and positive in its input. The support from the editorial officer has been very agile, always with the intention of improving the article and taking into account our subsequent corrections.
My article, titled 'No Way Out of the Smartphone Epidemic Without Considering the Insights of Brain Research,' has been republished in the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. The review process was seamless and professional, with the editors being both friendly and supportive. I am deeply grateful for their efforts.
To Dear Erin Aust – Editorial Coordinator of Journal of General Medicine and Clinical Practice! I declare that I am absolutely satisfied with your work carried out with great competence in following the manuscript during the various stages from its receipt, during the revision process to the final acceptance for publication. Thank Prof. Elvira Farina
Dear Jessica, and the super professional team of the ‘Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions’ I am sincerely grateful to the coordinated work of the journal team for the no problem with the submission of my manuscript: “Cardiometabolic Disorders in A Pregnant Woman with Severe Preeclampsia on the Background of Morbid Obesity (Case Report).” The review process by 5 experts was fast, and the comments were professional, which made it more specific and academic, and the process of publication and presentation of the article was excellent. I recommend that my colleagues publish articles in this journal, and I am interested in further scientific cooperation. Sincerely and best wishes, Dr. Oleg Golyanovskiy.
Dear Ashley Rosa, Editorial Coordinator of the journal - Psychology and Mental Health Care. " The process of obtaining publication of my article in the Psychology and Mental Health Journal was positive in all areas. The peer review process resulted in a number of valuable comments, the editorial process was collaborative and timely, and the quality of this journal has been quickly noticed, resulting in alternative journals contacting me to publish with them." Warm regards, Susan Anne Smith, PhD. Australian Breastfeeding Association.
Dear Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator, Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, Auctores Publishing LLC. I appreciate the journal (JCCI) editorial office support, the entire team leads were always ready to help, not only on technical front but also on thorough process. Also, I should thank dear reviewers’ attention to detail and creative approach to teach me and bring new insights by their comments. Surely, more discussions and introduction of other hemodynamic devices would provide better prevention and management of shock states. Your efforts and dedication in presenting educational materials in this journal are commendable. Best wishes from, Farahnaz Fallahian.
Dear Maria Emerson, Editorial Coordinator, International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews, Auctores Publishing LLC. I am delighted to have published our manuscript, "Acute Colonic Pseudo-Obstruction (ACPO): A rare but serious complication following caesarean section." I want to thank the editorial team, especially Maria Emerson, for their prompt review of the manuscript, quick responses to queries, and overall support. Yours sincerely Dr. Victor Olagundoye.
Dear Ashley Rosa, Editorial Coordinator, International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. Many thanks for publishing this manuscript after I lost confidence the editors were most helpful, more than other journals Best wishes from, Susan Anne Smith, PhD. Australian Breastfeeding Association.
Dear Agrippa Hilda, Editorial Coordinator, Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. The entire process including article submission, review, revision, and publication was extremely easy. The journal editor was prompt and helpful, and the reviewers contributed to the quality of the paper. Thank you so much! Eric Nussbaum, MD
Dr Hala Al Shaikh This is to acknowledge that the peer review process for the article ’ A Novel Gnrh1 Gene Mutation in Four Omani Male Siblings, Presentation and Management ’ sent to the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews was quick and smooth. The editorial office was prompt with easy communication.
Dear Erin Aust, Editorial Coordinator, Journal of General Medicine and Clinical Practice. We are pleased to share our experience with the “Journal of General Medicine and Clinical Practice”, following the successful publication of our article. The peer review process was thorough and constructive, helping to improve the clarity and quality of the manuscript. We are especially thankful to Ms. Erin Aust, the Editorial Coordinator, for her prompt communication and continuous support throughout the process. Her professionalism ensured a smooth and efficient publication experience. The journal upholds high editorial standards, and we highly recommend it to fellow researchers seeking a credible platform for their work. Best wishes By, Dr. Rakhi Mishra.
Dear Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator, Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, Auctores Publishing LLC. The peer review process of the journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions was excellent and fast, as was the support of the editorial office and the quality of the journal. Kind regards Walter F. Riesen Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Walter F. Riesen.
Dear Ashley Rosa, Editorial Coordinator, International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews, Auctores Publishing LLC. Thank you for publishing our article, Exploring Clozapine's Efficacy in Managing Aggression: A Multiple Single-Case Study in Forensic Psychiatry in the international journal of clinical case reports and reviews. We found the peer review process very professional and efficient. The comments were constructive, and the whole process was efficient. On behalf of the co-authors, I would like to thank you for publishing this article. With regards, Dr. Jelle R. Lettinga.
Dear Clarissa Eric, Editorial Coordinator, Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Studies, I would like to express my deep admiration for the exceptional professionalism demonstrated by your journal. I am thoroughly impressed by the speed of the editorial process, the substantive and insightful reviews, and the meticulous preparation of the manuscript for publication. Additionally, I greatly appreciate the courteous and immediate responses from your editorial office to all my inquiries. Best Regards, Dariusz Ziora
Dear Chrystine Mejia, Editorial Coordinator, Journal of Neurodegeneration and Neurorehabilitation, Auctores Publishing LLC, We would like to thank the editorial team for the smooth and high-quality communication leading up to the publication of our article in the Journal of Neurodegeneration and Neurorehabilitation. The reviewers have extensive knowledge in the field, and their relevant questions helped to add value to our publication. Kind regards, Dr. Ravi Shrivastava.
Dear Clarissa Eric, Editorial Coordinator, Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Studies, Auctores Publishing LLC, USA Office: +1-(302)-520-2644. I would like to express my sincere appreciation for the efficient and professional handling of my case report by the ‘Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Studies’. The peer review process was not only fast but also highly constructive—the reviewers’ comments were clear, relevant, and greatly helped me improve the quality and clarity of my manuscript. I also received excellent support from the editorial office throughout the process. Communication was smooth and timely, and I felt well guided at every stage, from submission to publication. The overall quality and rigor of the journal are truly commendable. I am pleased to have published my work with Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Studies, and I look forward to future opportunities for collaboration. Sincerely, Aline Tollet, UCLouvain.
Dear Ms. Mayra Duenas, Editorial Coordinator, International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. “The International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews represented the “ideal house” to share with the research community a first experience with the use of the Simeox device for speech rehabilitation. High scientific reputation and attractive website communication were first determinants for the selection of this Journal, and the following submission process exceeded expectations: fast but highly professional peer review, great support by the editorial office, elegant graphic layout. Exactly what a dynamic research team - also composed by allied professionals - needs!" From, Chiara Beccaluva, PT - Italy.
Dear Maria Emerson, Editorial Coordinator, we have deeply appreciated the professionalism demonstrated by the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. The reviewers have extensive knowledge of our field and have been very efficient and fast in supporting the process. I am really looking forward to further collaboration. Thanks. Best regards, Dr. Claudio Ligresti
