Gout and a Subsequent Increased Risk of Erectile Dysfunction in Men Aged 64 and Under: A Nationwide Cohort Study in Taiwan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Few studies have examined the relationship between gout and erectile dysfunction (ED). We investigated whether patients with gout exhibited an increased risk of ED. METHODS: This longitudinal nationwide cohort study investigated the incidence and risk of ED in 19,368 men with gout who were newly diagnosed between January 2002 and December 2008. A total of 77,472 controls without gout were randomly selected from the general population and frequency-matched according to age and sex. The patients were followed up from the date on which they were included in the study cohort to the date of an ED event, censoring, or December 31, 2010. We conducted the Cox proportional hazard model to estimate the effects of gout on ED risk including age and comorbidities. RESULTS: The gout cohort exhibited a 1.21-fold adjusted HR of subsequent ED development compared with the non-gout cohort (95% CI 1.03-1.44). The incidence of ED increased with age in both cohorts and was higher among the patients in the gout cohort than among those in the non-gout cohort. Compared to the patients without gout and comorbidities, the patients with both gout and any type of comorbidity exhibited a 2.04-fold risk of developing ED (95% CI 1.63-2.57). Further, the patients with gout who had numerous comorbidities exhibited the dose-response effect in developing ED. CONCLUSION: This nationwide cohort study revealed that ED risk is significantly higher in patients with gout than in the general population.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".