The multinational Men's Attitudes to Life Events and Sexuality study: the influence of diabetes on self-reported erectile function, attitudes and treatment-seeking patterns in men with erectile dysfunction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To identify the prevalence of erectile dysfunction (ED) in men with diabetes, and to compare the perceptions of ED and the treatment-seeking behaviour of these men with men with ED without diabetes. METHODS: Phase I of this multinational study involved 27,839 men who were questioned about a number of men's health issues including ED, diabetes and cardiovascular conditions (i.e. hypertension, high cholesterol and angina). Epidemiological associations between these conditions were explored. Phase II involved 2912 men with self-reported ED, aged 20-75 years. Participants completed questionnaires concerning their ED, efforts to seek treatment for their ED, and potential influences that might affect treatment-seeking behaviour. Comparison of these responses was made between men with ED and diabetes and men with ED without diabetes. RESULTS: There was a clear association between self-reported ED and diabetes, hypertension, angina and high cholesterol. Men with diabetes were more likely to consider their ED to be severe and permanent and to speak to a physician or a nurse about their ED, compared with men without diabetes. Sildenafil use was similar in both groups, but men with diabetes were more likely to have discontinued use, mainly because of the lack of treatment efficacy. CONCLUSION: Men with diabetes were more likely to consider their ED to be severe and permanent, compared with men without diabetes. Furthermore, men with diabetes were more likely to discontinue sildenafil therapy, primarily because of poor efficacy. These findings suggest a need for alternative treatments for ED, especially in men with diabetes.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".