The Effect of Musculoskeletal Pain on Sexual Function in Middle-aged and Elderly European Men: Results from the European Male Ageing Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether musculoskeletal pain was associated with impaired sexual function in a population sample of middle-aged and older men. METHODS: The European Male Ageing Study (EMAS), a multicenter population-based study of men aged 40-79 years, was used to investigate this hypothesis. A questionnaire asked about the presence and duration of musculoskeletal pain, allowing subjects to be classified into 1 of 3 groups: those reporting chronic widespread pain (CWP), those reporting pain but not CWP ("some pain"), and those with no pain. Subjects completed a sexual function questionnaire from which 3 domains were considered: overall sexual functioning (OSF), sexual functioning-related distress (SFD), and change in sexual functioning compared to 1 year ago (CSF). RESULTS: A total of 3206 men [mean age 60 (SD 11) yrs] had complete data on pain status. Of these, 8.7% had CWP and 50.34% had "some pain." Pain was associated with lower OSF, and higher SFD and CSF scores. After adjustment for putative confounding factors, the associations became non-significant with OSF and CSF but persisted for SFD. Associations between pain status and some items within the sexual functioning domains, including frequency of sexual intercourse, frequency of morning erections, sexual desire, and orgasm were also significant, although these associations varied by pain status. CONCLUSION: Musculoskeletal pain is associated with several aspects of sexual functioning. These relationships differ depending on the extent of the pain (chronic or not) and are also largely confounded by other health-related factors, primarily depression.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".