1.Mortimer, ST, van der Horst, G, Mortimer, D. The future of computer-aided sperm analysis. Asian J Androl 2015; 17: 545–53.
2.Amann, RP, Waberski, D. Computer-assisted sperm analysis (CASA): capabilities and potential developments. Theriogenology 2014; 81: 5–17.
3.van der Horst, G, Maree, L, du Plessis, SS. Current perspectives of CASA applications in diverse mammalian sperm. Reprod Fertil Dev 2018; 30: 875–88.
4.Yeste, M, Bonet, S, Rodríguez-Gil, JE, Rivera Del Álamo, MM. Evaluation of sperm motility with CASA-Mot: which factors may influence our measurements? Reprod Fertil Dev 2018; 30: 789–98.
5.Ýaniz, JL, Silvestre, MA, Santolaria, P, Soler, C. CASA-Mot in mammals: an update. Reprod Fertil Dev 2018; 30: 799–809.
6.van der Horst, G, du Plessis, SS. Not just the marriage of Figaro: but the marriage of WHO/ESHRE semen analysis criteria with sperm functionality. Adv Androl Online 2017; 4: 6–21.
7.Tomlinson, MJ, Pooley, K, Simpson, T, Newton, T, Hopkisson, J, Jayaprakasan, K, Jayaprakasan, R, Naeem, A, Pridmore, A. Validation of a novel computer-assisted sperm analysis (CASA) system using multitarget-tracking algorithms. Fertil Steril 2010; 93: 1911–20.
8.Dearing, CG, Kilkburn, S, Lindsay, KS. Validation of the sperm class analyser CASA system for sperm counting in a busy diagnostic semen analysis laboratory. Human Fertil 2014; 17: 37–44.
9.World Health Organization. (1999) Laboratory Manual for the Examination of Human Semen and Sperm-Cervical Mucus Interaction, 4th ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
10.World Health Organization. (2010) WHO Laboratory Manual for the Examination and Processing of Human Semen, 5th ed. Geneva: The WHO Press.
11.Talarczyk-Desole, J, Berger, A, Taszarek-Hauke, G, Hauke, J, Pawelczyk, L, Jedrzejczak, P. Manual vs. computer-assisted sperm analysis: can CASA replace manual assessment of human semen in clinical practice? Ginekol Pol 2017; 88: 56–60.
12.Dearing, C, Jayasena, C, Lindsay, K. Can the Sperm Class Analyser (SCA) CASA-Mot system for human sperm motility analysis reduce imprecision and operator subjectivity and improve semen analysis? Human Fertil 2019; 6: 11.
13.Kochman, D, Marchlewska, K, Walczak-Jedrzejowska, R, Słowikowska-Hilczer, J, Kula, K, du Plessis, S, Blignaut, R, van der Horst, G. Comparison of manual and computer aided sperm morphology analysis. Adv Androl Online 2016; 3: 75.
14.Lammers, J, Splingart, C, Barrière, Jean M, Fréour, T. Double-blind prospective study comparing two automated sperm analyzers versus manual semen assessment. J Assist Reprod Genet 2014; 31: 35–43.
15.European Society for Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE). Guidelines on the application of CASA technology in the analysis of spermatozoa. Hum Reprod 1998; 13: 142–5.
16.Bompart, D, García-Molina, A, Valverde, A, Caldeira, C, Yániz, J, Núñez de Murga, M, Soler, C. CASA-Mot technology: how results are affected by the frame rate and counting chamber. Reprod Fertil Dev 2018; 30: 810–19.
17.Gallagher, MT, Smith, DJ, Kirkman-Brown, JC. CASA: tracking the past and plotting the future. Reprod Fertil Dev 2018; 30: 867–74.
18.Tomlinson, MJ, Naeem, A. CASA in the medical laboratory: CASA in diagnostic andrology and assisted conception. Reprod Fertil Dev 2018; 30: 850–9.
19.Menkveld, R, Wong, WY, Lombard, CJ, Wetzels, AMM, Thomas, CMG, Merkus, HMWM, Steegers-Theunissen, RPM. Semen parameters, including WHO and strict criteria morphology, in a fertile and subfertile population: an effort towards standardization of in-vivo thresholds. Hum Reprod 2001; 16: 1165–71.
20.Maree, L, Menkveld, R, du Plessis, SS, van der Horst, G. Morphometric dimensions of the human sperm head depend on the staining method used. Hum Reprod 2010; 25: 1369–82.
21.Mukhopadhyay, D, Varghese, AC, Nandi, P, Banerjee, SK, Bhattacharyya, AK. CASA-based sperm kinematics of environmental risk factor-exposed human semen samples designated as normozoospermic in conventional analysis. Andrologia 2010; 42: 242–6.
22.Semet, M, Paci, M, Saïas-Magnan, J, Metzler-Guillemain, C, Boissier, R, Lejeune, H, Perrin, J. The impact of drugs on male fertility: a review. Andrology 2017; 5: 640–63.
23.Ayad, BM, van der Horst, G, du Plessis, SS. Short abstinence: a potential strategy for the improvement of sperm quality. Middle East Fertil Soc J 2018; 23: 37–43.
24.Alipour, H, van der Horst, G, Christiansen, OB, Dardmeh, F, Jørgensen, N, Nielsen, HI, Hnida, C. Improved sperm kinematics in semen samples collected after 2 h versus 4–7 days of ejaculation abstinence. Hum Reprod 2017; 32: 1364–72.