Investigative Models in Erectile Dysfunction: A State-of-the-Art Review of Current Animal Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".