ArticleInternational journal of impotence research2025
Patients' perceptions of nocturnal erectile function assessment with the RigiScan®.
Article in International journal of impotence research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Progress in the research of artificial intelligence in andrology: a narrative review.Translational andrology and urology · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence-Based Clinical Decision-Making in Erectile Dysfunction: a Narrative Review.Current urology reports · 2024Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In recent decades, the assessment of male sexual function has been a subject of enduring interest. The use of the RigiScan®, a conventional diagnostic tool designed to differentiate between psychological and organic causes of erectile dysfunction (ED), has decreased due to several disadvantages. In this study, patient perspectives on the merits and drawbacks of the RigiScan®, as well as preferences for a future diagnostic device, were explored. Patients at St. Antonius Hospital and Leiden University Medical Center who underwent RigiScan® examinations were surveyed. A pretested questionnaire was used to gather data on their experiences, satisfaction levels, and suggestions for improvement. Among the 120 distributed questionnaires, a 39.2% response rate was achieved. The process of applying the RigiScan® around the penis was reported to have an average difficulty rating of 4.6 ± 2.5 (range: 1-9) points. While 74.5% of the participants were able to keep the device on all night, 25.5% of the participants experienced difficulties. Sleep quality was assessed at 5.5 ± 2.6 (range: 0-9) points. The participants reported an average pain rating of 4.7 ± 2.8 (range: 0-9) points. Despite these challenges, 69.6% of the participants reported that the device met their expectations, while 30.4% of the participants were dissatisfied. The key areas for improvement included device size (33.7%), user-friendliness (25.5%), sound (9.2%), hygiene (7.1%), and pain (6.1%). This study revealed that patients who underwent a nocturnal erectile function assessment with the RigiScan® device preferred a more patient-friendly and less intrusive diagnostic device. Further research is needed to determine whether a new sensor possessing these improved characteristics can increase patient satisfaction.
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.