MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Physician‐rated patient preference and patient‐ and partner‐rated preference for tadalafil or sildenafil citrate: results from the Canadian ‘Treatment of Erectile Dysfunction’ observational study

2006· article· en· W2077906125 on OpenAlexaffabout
Lee Jc, Peter Pommerville, Gerald Brock, Robert Gagnon, Pravinsagar G. Mehta, MICHOKE KRISDAPHONGS, Melanie Chan, John Chan, R. A. Dickson

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Urology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaWestern UniversityEli Lilly (Canada)Rockyview General HospitalUniversity of Calgary
FundersEli Lilly and Company
KeywordsTadalafilSildenafilErectile dysfunctionMedicinePreferenceObservational studyClinical trialPhysical therapyInternal medicineFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To determine physician-based ratings of patient preference, patient preference, partner preference and physician-based assessment of the reasons for patient preference for tadalafil or sildenafil citrate (sildenafil) as a treatment for erectile dysfunction (ED) in routine clinical practice. Phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors (PDE5i) are effective and well-tolerated therapies for ED, but patient and partner preferences for these treatments might be determined by many factors, both medical and nonmedical. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The Treatment of ED (TED) observational trial was a multicentre study conducted in Canada to determine patient and partner preferences for the PDE5i tadalafil or sildenafil in routine clinical practice. Patients who planned to change treatment from tadalafil or sildenafil to the alternative drug were invited to participate in the study. The study duration was 4-12 weeks. At visit 1 (baseline), patient background information was collected. At visit 2, physicians answered the physician-rated patient-treatment preference questionnaire, patients answered the treatment preference question (TPQ) and the global assessment question (GAQ), and partners answered the partner TPQ. RESULTS: The TED study was conducted at 266 sites across Canada and involved 2425 patients who used the allowed study medications, and 295 sexual partners who attended clinic visits. More than 98% of patients completed the study. Responses to the preference questionnaires showed that physician-rated patient preference, patient preference, and partner preference had a similar pattern preference, with a significantly higher proportion preferring tadalafil over sildenafil regardless of the change in treatment (i.e. sildenafil to tadalafil or tadalafil to sildenafil). Responses to the GAQ showed that nearly 90% of the patients who took either PDE5i said that the treatment had improved erections. CONCLUSIONS: TED is the first study to assess physician-based ratings of patient preference, patient preference, and partner preference for tadalafil or sildenafil in a routine clinical practice settings. Most participants preferred tadalafil over sildenafil. Understanding the underlying reasons influencing the preference might improve patient compliance and satisfaction with treatment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.543
Threshold uncertainty score0.909

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.120
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.164 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of UrologySame topicSexual function and dysfunction studiesFrench-language works237,207