Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36534155›Full record

ReviewWorld journal of urology2023

Atlas of 35 patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in andrology: a comprehensive overview of literature.

G Brown, B K Somani

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in World journal of urology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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

2 authors.

G BrownDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Southampton NHS Trust, Southampton, UK.
B K SomaniDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Southampton NHS Trust, Southampton, UK. bhaskarsomani@yahoo.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6248-6478

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionDisorders of male sexual health and functioning are complex and can have significant deleterious effects on patients psychological wellbeing and interpersonal relationships. It is well recognised that clinicians have an overall poor understanding of the true effect that disease has on their patients and self-reported patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) aim to better communicate these issues. PROMs are generally welcomed by patients and their use in this highly sensitive area of clinical practice is well recognised. An atlas of available PROMs for key conditions in andrology is presented in this article.

methodsA comprehensive search of world literature was conducted from the inception of databases to June 2022, to identify male-specific PROMs relevant to four key andrological disorders: hypogonadism, erectile dysfunction, penile curvature and disorders of ejaculation. Each tool was evaluated in narrative format.

results35 PROMs were identified. 6 were designed for the assessment of hypogonadism, 18 for erectile dysfunction, one for penile curvature and 10 for ejaculatory disorders. In general, PROMs were brief, self-administered and user-friendly. There was sufficient scope and variety in all categories (apart from penile curvature) to give the clinician flexibility in tool selection and find an appropriate tool for different scenarios.

conclusionA number of PROMs exist within andrology that can be utilised in both research and clinical settings. PROMs enable subjective evaluation of difficult-to-assess aspects of the patient experience.

Indexed as

AndrologyErectile DysfunctionHypogonadismPenile IndurationHumansMalePatient Reported Outcome MeasuresAndrologyEjaculationErectile dysfunctionHypogonadismPeyronie’s diseasePROM

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.