MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Treatment of Erectile Dysfunction study: focus on treatment satisfaction of patients and partners

2006· article· en· W2134025139 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Urology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsVictoria General HospitalRegina General HospitalJewish General HospitalSt Joseph's Health CareSt Joseph's Health CentreVancouver General HospitalMount Sinai HospitalWestern University
FundersEli Lilly and Company
KeywordsTadalafilSildenafilErectile dysfunctionMedicinePatient satisfactionObservational studycGMP-specific phosphodiesterase type 5Clinical trialClinical endpointPhysical therapyInternal medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To assess patient and partner preferences for, and satisfaction with, tadalafil or sildenafil (phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors) in routine clinical practice for treating erectile dysfunction (ED), as these are important outcomes that might influence treatment adherence. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a multicentre, prospective observational trial in Canada, patients with ED were eligible if they planned to change treatment from tadalafil to sildenafil or vice versa. Data were collected at baseline and 4-12 weeks later (endpoint). Satisfaction was assessed using patient and partner versions of the Erectile Dysfunction Inventory of Treatment Satisfaction (EDITS) questionnaire. EDITS index scores range from 0 (extremely low treatment satisfaction) to 100 (extremely high treatment satisfaction). RESULTS: Of 2425 patients, approximately 98% completed the study and 295 partners participated. When patients changed from sildenafil to tadalafil (1722 men) the mean EDITS index scores increased significantly for both patients (from 61.6 to 78.3) and partners (from 65.0 to 82.6; both P < 0.001). When patients changed from tadalafil to sildenafil (703 men), the mean EDITS index scores increased slightly but significantly for patients (from 68.8 to 70.2; P = 0.007) but not partners (from 76.8 to 68.9; P = 0.066). For the individual EDITS questions, mean scores increased significantly from baseline to endpoint on all questions for patients (all 11 questions; P < 0.001) and partners (all five questions; P < 0.001) in the sildenafil-to-tadalafil group, and in the tadalafil-to-sildenafil group, mean scores for patients decreased on nine of 11 questions (seven of nine significantly; P < 0.041) and mean scores for partners decreased on all five (two significantly; P < 0.049). For treatment preference, regardless of the change in treatment (i.e. sildenafil-tadalafil or tadalafil-sildenafil), a significantly higher percentage of patients and partners preferred tadalafil to sildenafil. CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate that patients with ED (and their partners) who changed from sildenafil to tadalafil treatment or vice versa in a routine clinical practice setting had higher treatment satisfaction when taking tadalafil than sildenafil, as assessed by most measures of EDITS. The higher treatment satisfaction with tadalafil might help to explain the greater preference for tadalafil compared with sildenafil in both patients and partners in this observational study.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.397
Threshold uncertainty score0.269

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.264 · 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