Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31031121›Full record

ReviewSexual medicine2019

Sex and Male Circumcision: Women's Preferences Across Different Cultures and Countries: A Systematic Review.

Brian J Morris, Catherine A Hankins, Eugenie R Lumbers, Adrian Mindel, Jeffrey D Klausner, John N Krieger, Guy Cox

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Sexual medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Brian J MorrisSchool of Medical Sciences and Bosch Institute, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia. Electronic address: brian.morris@sydney.edu.au.
Catherine A HankinsDepartment of Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Occupational Health, Faculty of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada; London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Eugenie R LumbersSchool of Biomedical Sciences and Pharmacy, Faculty of Health and Medicine and Priority Research Centre for Reproductive Science, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia; Mothers and Babies Research Centre, Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton, NSW, Australia.
Adrian MindelSchool of Medical Sciences and Bosch Institute, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Jeffrey D KlausnerDivision of Infectious Diseases and the Program in Global Health, Fielding School of Public Health, University of California Los Angeles Care Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
John N KriegerDepartment of Urology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA.
Guy CoxSchool of Medical Sciences and Bosch Institute, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Robert Bosch (Australia) · AULos Angeles Medical Center · USMater Mothers' Hospital · AUSeattle Reproductive Medicine · USUniversité de Montréal · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionWomen's choices for a sexual partner are influenced by numerous personal, cultural, social, political and religious factors, and may also include aspects of penile anatomy such as male circumcision (MC) status.

aimTo perform a systematic review examining (i) whether MC status influences women's preference for sexual activity and the reasons for this, and (ii) whether women prefer MC for their sons.

methodsPRISMA-compliant searches were conducted of PubMed, Google Scholar, Embase, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Articles that met the inclusion criteria were rated for quality using the SIGN system.

resultsDatabase searches identified 29 publications with original data for inclusion, including 22 for aim (i) and 4 of these and 7 others pertaining to aim (ii). In the overwhelming majority of studies, women expressed a preference for the circumcised penis. The main reasons given for this preference were better appearance, better hygiene, reduced risk of infection, and enhanced sexual activity, including vaginal intercourse, manual stimulation, and fellatio. In studies that assessed mothers' preference for MC of sons, health, disease prevention, and hygiene were cited as major reasons for this preference. Cultural differences in preference were evident among some of the studies examined. Nevertheless, a preference for a circumcised penis was seen in most populations regardless of the frequency of MC in the study setting.

conclusionWomen's preferences generally favor the circumcised penis for sexual activity, hygiene, and lower risk of infection. The findings add to the already well-established health benefits favoring MC and provide important sociosexual information on an issue of widespread interest. Morris BJ, Hankins CA, Lumbers ER, et al. Sex and Male Circumcision: Women's Preferences Across Different Cultures and Countries: A Systematic Review. Sex Med 2019;7:145-161.

Indexed as

Disease RiskFellatioFemale Sexual ActivityFemale Sexual PleasureHygieneMale CircumcisionParental DecisionVaginal Intercourse

Identifiers

PMID31031121
PMCPMC6523040
OpenAlexW2940774674

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.