ArticleInternational journal of impotence research
Predicting erectile dysfunction in sexually active patients seeking prostate health screening: proposal for a multivariable risk stratification.
Article in International journal of impotence research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To address the severity of erectile dysfunction (ED) in consecutive sexually active men seeking a prostate health screening through a multivariable risk stratification including comorbidities and lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). Four hundred and twenty five consecutive subjects with stable sexual relationship with normal testosterone levels were enrolled. The International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) and the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) questionnaires were collected and health-significant comorbidities were scored with the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI). All the independent predictors of ED were combined to form four different risk categories of ED: low (age⩽65 years and IPSS<8 and CCI=0), intermediate (one of the following: age>65 years, IPSS⩾8 or CCI⩾1), high (two of the following: age>65 years, IPSS⩾8 or CCI⩾1) and very high (age >65 years, IPSS⩾8 and CCI⩾1). The prevalence of ED increased with increase of CCI (χ(2) likelihood ratio: 40.85, P=0.001). The median of the IIEF-5 significantly reduced with the increase of the CCI (P<0.001) and with the worsening of our risk group stratification (P<0.001). At univariate logistic regression analysis very high risk was significantly associated with of ED (odds ratio: 26.85, P<0.001). Very high-risk group predicted ED with 88% and 56% of specificity and sensitivity, respectively. Combining these risk factors through our risk stratification may be usefulness in revealing an underling ED.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26224573What 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.