Letter to the editor: Phosphorus as predictive factor for erectile dysfunction in middle aged men: A cross sectional study in Korea; Methodological issues to avoid prediction fallacy.

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.

1. Letter to editor: The waist circumference-adjusted associations between hyperuricemia and other lifestyle-related diseases: methodological issues in cross-sectional study.Diabetology & metabolic syndrome · 2017
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Commented on by
  The authors reply: Phosphorus as predictive factor for erectile dysfunction in middle aged men: A cross sectional study in Korea.2017
• Comment on
  Phosphorus as predictive factor for erectile dysfunction in middle aged men: A cross sectional study in Korea.2016

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as