ArticleJournal of diabetes investigation2020
What is the best biological parameter to predict erectile dysfunction in men aged >55 years with type 2 diabetes?
Article in Journal of diabetes investigation, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Is There an Association Between Vitamin D Deficiency and Erectile Dysfunction? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Nutrients · 2020Pooled it
- The Association Between Vitamin D Levels and Erectile Dysfunction in Men: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Importance of assessing erectile dysfunction in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus based on glucose fluctuation: a Cross-Sectional study.Endocrine · 2025Article
- Phase I and registry study of autologous bone marrow concentrate evaluated in PDE5 inhibitor refractory erectile dysfunction.Journal of translational medicine · 2020Article
- What is the best biological parameter to predict erectile dysfunction in men aged >55 years with type 2 diabetes?Journal of diabetes investigation · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To date, there is no evidence regarding the best biological marker to predict erectile dysfunction (ED) in men aged >55 years with type 2 diabetes. This prospective study included data from men aged >55 years with type 2 diabetes. ED was assessed by the International Index of Erectile Function 15-item survey. Total testosterone (TT) levels and bioavailable testosterone were measured; the free testosterone index was calculated. Data from 155 men (aged 64 ± 7 years) were explored. The prevalence of ED and testosterone deficiency was 78.7% and 34.8%, respectively. After univariate analysis, TT and bioavailable testosterone were associated with ED (P = 0.01). After multivariate analysis, and adjustment for age, body mass index, tobacco, alcohol, duration of diabetes, TT, bioavailable testosterone, vitamin D and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, we found that only high-sensitivity C-reactive protein was significantly predictive of ED. TT could predict ED, but it lacks specificity. We found a potential role of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein as a predictive marker of ED in this targeted population.
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.