Effect of alternative and complementary medicine on male infertility: An umbrella review

Abstract

AbstractBackground and AimsThere is increasing interest worldwide in using alternative and complementary approaches for treating male infertility. This interest has spawned a multitude of published systematic reviews and meta‐analyses. The aim of this Umbrella review was to consolidate the available evidence regarding the effect of complementary and alternative medicine on male infertility to inform clinical decision‐making processes.MethodsA comprehensive search was conducted to identify systematic reviews and meta‐analyses pertaining to the effects of complementary and alternative medicine on male infertility. This search encompassed various databases including MEDLINE, CINAHL, PubMed, Scopus, Proquest, Google Scholar, SID, EMBASE, Magiran, Cochrane Library, Iranmedex, ScienceDirect, SAGE. Subsequently, two researchers independently extracted the data from the selected meta‐analyses and systematic reviews, and evaluated their methodological quality using the assessment of multiple systematic reviews 2 (AMSTAR2).ResultsThis analysis encompassed 11 studies, with four originating from Iran, two from Korea and five from China. The results regarding the effectiveness of complementary and alternative medicine are controversial, indicating a need for further research. The methodological quality of the systematic reviews and meta‐analyses appraised by AMSTAR 2 was rated as low or critically low. This assessment is attributed to inadequate examination of publication biases in the reviews and a lack of discussion regarding the effect of risk of bias.ConclusionThe existing evidence regarding the effectiveness of alternative and complementary medicine in addressing male infertility is limited. Furthermore, the overall methodological quality of the published systematic reviews and meta‐analyses may have been underestimated as the use of AMSTAR2 appears to be a more precise appraisal instrument compared to its predecessor.