MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2137117382 · doi:10.1111/j.1743-6109.04044.x

Intracavernous Chlorpromazine Versus Phentolamine: A Double-Blind Clinical Comparative Study

2004· article· en· W2137117382 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Sexual Medicine · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhentolaminePapaverineMedicineIntracavernous injectionChlorpromazinePhenoxybenzamineAnesthesiaErectile dysfunctionSurgeryInternal medicinePropranolol

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Intracavernous pharmacotherapy is one of the most common treatment modalities of erectile dysfunction (ED). There are different drugs that are used for intracavernous injection including papaverine, phentolamine, prostaglandins E1, phenoxybenzamine, and moxisylate. AIM: The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of chlorpromazine as an intracavernous vasoactive agent alone or with other drugs. METHODS: This study was performed on 50 patients presenting to our department complaining of ED. Patients were divided into three groups according to the type of intracavernous drug injected. Group A included 20 patients who received an intracavernous injection of 1 mL bimix (30 mg papaverine + 1 mg phentolamine) followed a week later by intracavernous test dose using a 1 mL mixture of papaverine and chlorpromazine (30 mg papaverine + 2.5 mg chlorpromazine). Group B included 20 patients who received an intracavernous injection of 1 mL trimix (30 mg papaverine + 1 mg phentolamine + 10 microg PGE1). A week later they received another intracavernous test dose using a 1 mL mixture of papaverine, PGE1, and chlorpromazine (30 mg papaverine + 2.5 mg chlorpromazine + 10 microg PGE1). Group C included 10 patients who received various intracavernous injections of chlorpromazine in doses 1 mg, 2 mg, 5 mg, and 10 mg. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in erection response and erection duration between phentolamine and chlorpromazine. Prolonged erection occurred in two patients of group B and postural hypotension occurred in three patients of group C. CONCLUSION: Chlorpromazine can be used as an intracavernous vasoactive agent; it is similar to phentolamine in efficacy and short-term side effect profile.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.374
Threshold uncertainty score0.542

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.320
GPT teacher head0.471
Teacher spread0.151 · 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