Improving the Sexual Quality of Life of Couples Affected by Erectile Dysfunction: A Double–Blind, Randomized, Placebo–Controlled Trial of Vardenafil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Erectile dysfunction (ED) has a dual negative impact on men and their female partners; both are likely to face a drop in sexual quality of life and challenges to their intimate relationship as couples' sexual activities are curtailed by the loss of erectile function. AIM: The primary objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of vardenafil vs. placebo in terms of success of maintenance of erection in men with ED and improvement of their female partner's sexual quality of life. METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, multicenter, flexible-dose, parallel-group comparison of vardenafil vs. placebo for 12 weeks in men (> or =18 years) with ED of > or = 6 months duration, and their female partners. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Changes in patient's overall response rate to Sexual Encounter Profile question 3 (SEP3) "Did your erection last long enough for you to have sexual intercourse?" and female partner's response to the quality of life domain of the modified Sexual Life Quality Questionnaire (mSLQQ-QOL) at last observation carried forward (LOCF) were considered the primary efficacy measures. In addition, patient's response to SEP2 "Were you able to insert your penis into your partner's vagina?," the erectile function domain of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-EF) and patient's mSLQQ-QOL score were also assessed. RESULTS: Compared with placebo, vardenafil significantly improved overall least square (LS) mean per-patient SEP3 success rate (28% vs. 68%; P < 0.0001) and partner's LS mean (standard error [SE]) mSLQQ-QOL score at LOCF (32.14 [3.24] vs. 65.80 [3.10]; P < 0.0001). In addition, compared with placebo, vardenafil also improved overall LS mean per-patient SEP2 success rate (47% vs. 80%; P < 0.0001), LS mean (SE) IIEF-EF scores at LOCF (12.7 [0.8] vs. 22.8 [0.8]; P < 0.0001) and patient's LS mean (SE) mSLQQ-QOL (28.37 [3.46] vs. 63.85 [3.28]; P < 0.0001) at LOCF. CONCLUSIONS: Vardenafil improved erectile function in men with ED and improved the sexual quality of life of the couple.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".