Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41299028›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of impotence research2025

Rethinking the peyronie's disease questionnaire: a perspective on inclusivity in sexual health assessment.

E Vannier, A Cocci, M Pezzoli, M Lo Re, K Van Renterghem, S Ward

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review 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 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. Article
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

6 authors.

E VannierDepartment of Urology, Kliniek Sint-Jan, Kruidtuinlaan 32 - 1000, Brussels, Belgium. enguerrand.vannier@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0000-0231-0342
A CocciDepartment of Urology, University of Florence, Largo Brambilla 3 - 50134 Firenze San Luca Nuovo Padiglione 16/Settore C/Piano II, Firenze, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0138-6294
M PezzoliDepartment of Urology, University of Florence, Careggi Hospital, 50100, Florence, Italy.
M Lo ReDepartment of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
K Van RenterghemUrology dept Hasselt, Hasselt University, Hasselt, Belgium.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5367-6651
S WardDepartment of Urology, Kliniek Sint-Jan, Kruidtuinlaan 32 - 1000, Brussels, Belgium.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0806-0510

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Peyronie's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ) has been instrumental in providing standardized, patient-centered evaluation of Peyronie's disease. However, the evolving understanding of sexual health and diversity invites a re-examination of this tool's underlying assumptions. This Perspective discusses the PDQ's current framework, its contributions, and its limitations, particularly in capturing the heterogeneity of patients' sexual experiences. Drawing from the developmental pathways of other sexual health instruments, we reflect on the importance of inclusivity in questionnaire design and the potential benefits of future revisions or alternative tools that better reflect contemporary clinical and sociocultural realities.

Identifiers

PMID41299028

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.