MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099881575 · doi:10.1111/jsm.12964

General Erectile Functioning among Young, Heterosexual Men Who Do and Do Not Report Condom-Associated Erection Problems (CAEP)

2015· article· en· W2099881575 on OpenAlexaff
Stephanie A. Sanders, Brandon J. Hill, Erick Janssen, Cynthia A. Graham, Richard A. Crosby, Robin R. Milhausen, William L. Yarber

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Sexual Medicine · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute of Child Health and Human Development
KeywordsCondomMedicineErectile dysfunctionErectile functionGynecologySexual intercourseYoung adultReproductive healthPopulationClinical psychologyDemographyFamily medicineGerontologyHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Surgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Condom-associated erection problems (CAEP) are an underestimated factor related to inconsistent or incomplete male condom use. The underlying mechanisms of CAEP are not understood, and whether men who report these difficulties are also likely to experience erectile problems in situations when condoms are not used has not been studied. AIM: The aim of the study was to investigate, in a sample of condom-using young, heterosexual men (aged 18-24 years), whether men who report CAEP are more likely to (i) have erection problems when not using condoms and (ii) meet criteria for erectile dysfunction. METHODS: A total of 479 men recruited online completed the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) and answered questions about erection problems experienced when using and not using condoms during the last 90 days. Demographic, sexual experience, and health status variables were investigated as correlates. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Self-reported frequency of erection loss during condom application or during penile-vaginal intercourse (PVI) in the past 90 days and IIEF-5 scores. RESULTS: Of the men, 38.4% were classified in the no CAEP group, 13.8% as having CAEP during condom application, 15.7% as having CAEP during PVI, and 32.2% as having CAEP during both condom application and PVI. Men reporting any form of CAEP were significantly more likely than men reporting no CAEP to also report erection difficulties during sexual activity when not using condoms. Men who reported CAEP during PVI only or during both application and PVI scored significantly lower on the IIEF-5 than men without CAEP. CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that men who report CAEP are also more likely to experience more generalized erection difficulties. Clinicians should assess whether men using condoms experience CAEP and where appropriate, refer for psychosexual therapy or provide condom skills education.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations17
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Sexual MedicineSame topicSexual function and dysfunction studiesFrench-language works237,207