SynthesisBJU international2026
Paediatric penile length: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BJU international, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess geographical variation in stretched penile length among prepubertal boys and evaluate temporal trends over the past two decades, as defining reference values for genital organ size remains crucial for early identification of development disorders.
methodsThe PubMed, Cochrane and Scopus databases (no deadlines for publishing were imposed) were searched according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analyses statement. Five authors independently extracted individual participant data and assessed the risk of bias. Studies with quantitative penile lengths were included; those involving congenital malformations were excluded. The review protocol was prospectively registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (registration number CRD42022335643).
resultsA total of 55 studies from 2000 to 2024 were evaluated, including data from 31 915 boys. Pooled mean stretched penile length estimates were 3.07 cm (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.88-3.26 cm) for the 1-week-old boys, 3.73 cm (95% CI 3.53-3.93 cm) for the 1-year-old boys, 4.69 cm (95% CI 4.49-4.88 cm) for the 2-5 year-old boys, and 5.43 cm (95% CI 5.20-5.66 cm) for the 5-10 year- old boys. When comparing data from the 2000s to the 2020s, stretched penile length decreased by 16.2% (from 3.46 to 2.90 cm), 16.3% (from 4.17 to 3.49 cm), 21.5% (from 5.31 to 4.17) and 26.2% (from 6.46 to 4.77 cm) in the 1-week-old, 1-year-old, 2-5-year-old and 5-10-year-old boys, respectively. Subgroup analysis for those aged >2 years showed significant variations by geographical region (P < 0.001).
conclusionsThe present study observed large variations in penile length across geographical regions and among prepubescent boys of different ages, while also suggesting a possible decline over the past two decades.
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.