ArticleBMJ open2019
Management of erectile dysfunction after prostate cancer treatment: cross-sectional surveys of the perceptions and experiences of patients and healthcare professionals in the UK.
Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Early and late CTCAE and patient-reported outcomes following prostate radiotherapy in the REQUITE cohort.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Erectile dysfunction in primary care: practice patterns, barriers, and opportunities-narrative review.Sexual medicine · 2026Review
- Sexual wellbeing support for men with prostate cancer: a qualitative study with patients.Translational andrology and urology · 2025Article
- Article
- Best Patient Care Practices for Administering PSMA-Targeted Radiopharmaceutical Therapy.Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2024Review
- Enhancing care: evaluating the impact of True North Sexual Health and Rehabilitation eTraining for healthcare providers working with prostate cancer patients and partners.Sexual medicine · 2024Article
- Sexual experiences and information needs among patients with prostate cancer: a qualitative study.Sexual medicine · 2024Article
- Cancers and erectile dysfunction: a Mendelian randomization study.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2024Article
- Diabetes-Related Microvascular Complications in Primary Health Care Settings in the West Bank, Palestine.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Development and external validation of multivariate prediction models for erectile dysfunction in men with localized prostate cancer.PloS one · 2023Article
- Men's perceptions and preferences regarding prostate cancer radiation therapy: A systematic scoping review.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2023Article
- Effects of a Brief E-Learning Resource on Sexual Attitudes and Beliefs of Healthcare Professionals Working in Prostate Cancer Care: A Pilot Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 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
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesErectile dysfunction (ED) is known to be a common consequence of radical treatment for prostate cancer (PCa) but is often under-reported and undertreated. This study aimed to explore how ED in patients with PCa is managed in real-life clinical practice, from the perspective of patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs). DESIGN AND
settingThis is a UK-wide cross-sectional survey of men with ED after treatment for PCa which covered assessment and discussion of erectile function, provision of supportive care and satisfaction with management. Parallel surveys of primary and secondary HCPs were also conducted.
resultsResponses were received from 546 men with ED after PCa treatment, 167 primary (general practitioners and practice nurses) and 94 secondary care HCPs (urologists and urology clinical nurse specialists). Survey findings revealed inadequate management of ED in primary care, particularly underprescribing of effective management options. A fifth of men (21%) were not offered any ED management, and a similar proportion (23%) were not satisfied with the way HCPs addressed their ED concerns. There was poor communication between HCPs and men, including failure to initiate discussions about ED and/or involve partners, with 12% of men not told that ED was a risk factor of PCa treatment. These issues seemed to reflect poor access to effective ED management or services and lack of primary HCP confidence in managing ED, as well as confusion over the roles and responsibilities among both HCPs and men.
conclusionsThis study confirms the need for better support for men from HCPs and more tailored and timely access to effective ED management after treatment for PCa. A clearly defined pathway is required for the discussion and management of ED, starting from the planning stage of PCa treatment. Improved adherence to ED management guidelines and better education and training for primary care HCPs are areas of priority.
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.