ArticleThe world journal of men's health2012
Survey on the perception of urogenital complications in diabetic patients.
Article in The world journal of men's health, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Diagnostic value of serum cystatin C for diabetic nephropathy: a meta-analysis.BMC endocrine disorders · 2022Pooled it
- Nerve Growth Factor in Diabetes Mellitus: Pathophysiological Mechanisms, Biomarkers and Therapeutic Opportunities.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- The influence of intermittent hypoxia, obesity, and diabetes on male genitourinary anatomy and voiding physiology.American journal of physiology. Renal physiology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeRetinopathy, neuropathy, and nephropathy are well-known complications of diabetes; they are often expected to occur and, therefore, are usually tested for. However, urogenital complications, such as sexual and voiding dysfunctions, are less well known, and consequently, many patients are not treated appropriately despite their symptoms. Thus, we surveyed diabetic patients with regard to their perception of urogenital complications. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe designed a survey for patients in our hospital who were being treated for diabetes mellitus (DM). The questionnaire included items on age, sex, treatment duration, treatment options for and the level of perception of urogenital symptoms, the presence of urogenital symptoms, and whether treatment was intended or had been initiated.
resultsIn total, 275 patients participated in the survey. The perception questions on DM-associated urogenital complications showed that 89 patients (32.4%) had no knowledge, 84 patients (30.5%) had some knowledge, and 102 patients (37.1%) had detailed knowledge about these complications. A total of 124 patients (45.1%) reported urogenital symptoms: 93 patients (75.0%) reported voiding dysfunction and 61 patients (49.2%) reported sexual dysfunction. Common symptoms of voiding dysfunction were urinary frequency, nocturia, sense of residual urine, weak stream, and urinary incontinence. Common symptoms of sexual dysfunction were reduced libido, and erectile and ejaculatory dysfunction.
conclusionsThe survey showed that the subjective prevalence rate of urogenital symptoms in diabetic patients was 45.1%. However, only a small percentage (37.1%) of the patients cognized that these symptoms were associated with DM. Therefore, it is necessary to properly inform and educate diabetic patients on possible urogenital complications that may occur.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.