Normal urinary and sexual function in men without evidence of prostate cancer from Montreal, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the rates of stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and erectile dysfunction (ED), and of associated bother, in men with no evidence of prostate cancer who participated in a prostate cancer-screening event. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A cohort of 366 men with no established diagnosis of prostate cancer completed a questionnaire addressing SUI, ED and associated bother. Socio-economic status and presence of comorbidities were also examined. RESULTS: The mean (range) age of the men was 54.8 (33-80) years; 90% of the men (271) had no SUI, and 76% (231) reported no urinary bother. Conversely, 62% (189) reported some degree of ED and 27% (82) some degree of sexual bother. Urinary bother (P < 0.001), erectile function (P < 0.001), and sexual bother (P < 0.02) were associated with age. Of all the men, 36% had one or more comorbidities. Men with one or more comorbidities had worse erectile function than those men with no comorbidity (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Few studies address normative values of SUI and ED rates in men with no established diagnosis of prostate cancer. We quantified the rate of SUI and it was practically negligible. Conversely, some degree of ED affected most of the present screened population. These data may be used as baseline references to evaluate the magnitude of functional and bother detriments after various prostate treatments.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".