Erectile Dysfunction Is Common among Patients with Gout
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether men with gout may have an increased prevalence of erectile dysfunction (ED) as compared with men without gout. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, men aged 18-89 presenting to the rheumatology clinic between August 26, 2010, and May 13, 2013, were asked to participate. The presence of ED was determined by the Sexual Health Inventory in Men (SHIM). SHIM classifies ED into 1 of 5 categories: absent (22-25), mild (17-21), mild to moderate (12-16), moderate (8-11), and severe (1-7). Patient's history, physical examination, and recent laboratory studies were reviewed as well. Descriptive statistics and subgroup analyses were used to summarize the data. RESULTS: Of the 201 men surveyed, 83 had gout (control, n = 118). A significantly greater proportion of patients with gout (63, 76%) had ED versus patients without gout (60, 51%, p = 0.0003). A significantly greater proportion of patients with gout (22, 26%) had severe ED versus patients without gout (17, 15%, p = 0.04). Patients with gout had an average SHIM score of 14.4 versus 18.48 in patients without gout (p < 0.0001). There was a statistically significant association between gout and ED. The association remained significant after adjustment for age, hypertension, diabetes, and obesity. CONCLUSION: ED is present in most men with gout and is frequently severe. We propose that patients with gout be routinely screened for ED.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".