ArticlePatient preference and adherence2024
A Web-Based Survey of Patients Dispensed Viagra Connect
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Drugs Used in "Chemsex"/Sexualized Drug Behaviour-Overview of the Related Clinical Psychopharmacological Issues.Brain sciences · 2025Review
- Addressing unmet needs for patients with erectile dysfunction: a narrative review of topical therapies.Sexual medicine · 2025Review
- A Web-Based Survey of Patients Dispensed Viagra ConnectPatient preference and adherence · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: A national additional risk minimization measures (aRMMs) program was implemented to train pharmacists for safe supply of non-prescription Viagra Connect Methods: A cross-sectional, web-based survey enrolled ED patients who purchased at least 1 supply of VC in UK, using a structured self-administered questionnaire. Patients were assessed for the suitability of VC and received appropriate advice from pharmacists. Descriptive statistics were used. Results: The final sample had 297 patients, who reported that pharmacists inquired about blood pressure and heart comorbidities (91.9%), relevant illnesses (87.9%), medications (86.5%), ED diagnosis (82.2%), and were advised to consult their doctor regarding ED (51.2%). Furthermore, 85.5% of patients were advised on how to take VC correctly, 82.2% on possible side effects for which they might have to discontinue taking VC and consult their doctor, 80.1% on being informed that ED could be caused by underlying conditions. About 65.0% reported that they had visited (19.2%) or planned to visit (45.8%) their doctor. A majority (68.7%) also indicated that they had received advice on lifestyle modifications to manage their ED-related health risks. Conclusion: This survey provided a reasonable confirmation of the effectiveness of the VC aRMMs program and assurance that ED patients, when requesting and purchasing VC in UK pharmacies, are assessed appropriately for suitability of VC and receive the appropriate advice from pharmacists.
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.