MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Investigative Models in Erectile Dysfunction: A State-of-the-Art Review of Current Animal Models

2011· review· en· W1872196862 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Sexual Medicine · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsSt Joseph's Health Care
Fundersnot available
KeywordsErectile dysfunctionAnimal modelPsychogenic diseaseMedicineSexual dysfunctionPsychosocialAnimal studiesPsychologyClinical psychologyBioinformaticsIntensive care medicineInternal medicinePsychiatryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Erectile dysfunction (ED) is a common male sexual disorder producing a significant negative impact on the physical and psychosocial health of men and their partners. The development of ED is frequently attributable to both psychogenic factors as well as physiological alterations in neural, vascular, hormonal, and endothelial function. While the complex nature of human sexual function cannot possibly be replicated fully, the use of animal models provides a valid alternative to the investigation and evaluation of sexual dysfunction. AIM: To review the existing English literature pertaining to the use of experimental models (predominantly rodent models) for the evaluation of ED. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Summary of relevant animal models of ED and the advantages and disadvantages of each animal model. METHODS: A Medline search using the key words "animal models of erectile dysfunction" was carried out and all relevant peer-reviewed English language was evaluated. RESULTS: While larger animals such as dogs, monkeys, cats, and rabbits were used in the early period of investigation (1960-1990), in recent times, rodents have largely replaced other animals as the predominant animal model for investigating erectile function. The most frequently reported models of ED can be classified as traumatic (cavernous nerve injury and arterial ligation) and metabolic (diabetic, hypercholesterolemia/lipidemia, and castration). Other models that have been studied include organic (smoking, hypertension, and chronic renal failure) and nonorganic (psychological) models. CONCLUSIONS: The development and utilization of the various rodent models has allowed for significant advances in the field of sexual dysfunction. Neurophysiological studies using the various animal models have provided important insights into human sexual dysfunction. At present, animal models play a significant role in evaluating novel therapeutics and surgical techniques and will likely continue to remain a vital research tool in the future.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.752
Threshold uncertainty score0.921

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.277
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.116 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it