ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2022
Bibliometric and visualization analysis of literature relating to diabetic erectile dysfunction.
Article in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Global research trends in the comorbidity of erectile dysfunction and premature ejaculation: a 20-year bibliometric analysis [2005-2025].Translational andrology and urology · 2026Article
- Mapping the Scientometric Landscape of Andrology: Trends, Gaps, and Future Directions in Male Reproductive Health: A Scoping Review.The world journal of men's health · 2026Article
- Research on stem cell therapy for spinal cord injury: a bibliometric and visual analysis from 2018-2023.Frontiers in genetics · 2024Review
- The global research of artificial intelligence on inflammatory bowel disease: A bibliometric analysis.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Diabetic erectile dysfunction (DMED) refers to erectile dysfunction secondary to diabetes. Erectile dysfunction is characterized by a persistent inability to achieve and maintain an erection sufficient to permit satisfactory sexual activity. Methods: Based on the Web of Science core collection database, we firstly analyzed the quantity and quality of publications in the field of DMED, secondly profiled the publishing groups in terms of country, institution, author's publication and cooperation network, and finally sorted out and summarized the hot topics of research. Results: From 2001 to 2022, a total of 1,403 articles relating to this topic were published in 359 journals. They represent the global research status, potential hotspots, and future research directions. The number of DMED-related publications and citations has steadily increased over the few past decades. Academic institutions from Europe and the United States have played a leading role in DMED research. The country, institution, journal, and author with the most publications were the United States (294), INHA University (39), the Journal of Sexual Medicine (156), and Ryu, Ji-Kan (29), respectively. The most common keywords were erectile dysfunction (796), men (256), diabetes (254), diabetes mellitus (239), prevalence (180), corpus cavernosum (171), dysfunction (155), mellitus (154), nitric-oxide synthase (153), and expression (140). The main keyword-based research topics and hotspots in the DMED field were oral sildenafil, smooth muscle relaxation, nitric oxide synthase, gene therapy, metabolic syndrome, cavernous nerve injury, stem cell, and penile prosthesis. Discussion: The terms oral sildenafil, smooth muscle relaxation, nitric oxide synthase, gene therapy, metabolic syndrome, cavernous nerve injury, stem cell, and penile prosthesis will be at the forefront of DMED-related research.
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.