Does Subjective Tinnitus Cause Sexual Disturbance?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Tinnitus can cause psychological problems, which can affect sexual performance. The aim of this study was to investigate sexual disturbance related to the psychological problems of patients with subjective tinnitus. MATERIALS AND METHOD: The subjective tinnitus group with normal hearing levels consisted of 20 patients (10 male, 10 female) who were nonpsychiatric. The control group consisted of 20 healthy patients (10 male, 10 female) with normal hearing levels who did not have tinnitus and were nonpsychiatric. All subjects were married and had an active sexual life. Using a questionnaire, the subjective tinnitus loudness level score (STLL-Sc) was found. Using Zung Anxiety and Depression Scale, self-rating depression scale (SDS) was found in the study and control groups. Sexual function was assessed in all male subjects with the International Index of Erectile Functions (IIEF) and in all female subjects with the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI). RESULTS: In females, the satisfaction subscore was slightly lower than normal limits in both the study and control groups. In males, the IIEF showed an insignificant, negative correlation with the STLL-Sc and the SDS and a positive correlation with tinnitus duration. In females, the FSFI showed an insignificant negative correlation with the STLL-Sc and a positive correlation with tinnitus duration and the SDS. CONCLUSION: Sexual disturbance is seen in very quiet- and intermediate-level tinnitus sufferers in the early period of the disease. Over time, they become used to living with their tinnitus, and no loss in sexual performance is seen. In the future, we plan to investigate the sexual disturbance of patients with severe STLL-Scs.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".