Erectile dysfunction risk factors for patients entering�dialysis programme
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to determine the risk factors of erectile dysfunction (ED) for patients entering the dialysis programme with haemodialysis (HD) or peritoneal dialysis (PD). Participants were adult males with sexual partners. They were given the semi-quantitative standard International Index of Erectile Function questionnaire. We added the common risk factors in specially designed questions to cover our objectives. The data were analysed using a multivariate regression model. Fifty-two patients fulfilled the eligibility criteria and completed this questionnaire. Twenty-five were on HD and 27 on PD. Only 17.3% were potent on entry into the study. Among the rest 71% were classified under severe ED. Sexual desire appeared less affected in comparison to other domains. Although 66.6% expressed their interest in treatment for ED, none of the patients received any. Stepwise selection analysis identified the only significant risk factor to be older age. There was no difference between the two populations of HD and PD. It is concluded that ED is very prevalent in men beginning dialysis; it should be assessed and treatment be offered.
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) | 0.002 | 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".