Basic Science Evidence for the Link Between Erectile Dysfunction and Cardiometabolic Dysfunction
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Although clinical evidence supports an association between cardiovascular/metabolic diseases (CVMD) and erectile dysfunction (ED), scientific evidence for this link is incompletely elucidated. AIM: This study aims to provide scientific evidence for the link between CVMD and ED. METHODS: In this White Paper, the Basic Science Committee of the Sexual Medicine Society of North America assessed the current literature on basic scientific support for a mechanistic link between ED and CVMD, and deficiencies in this regard with a critical assessment of current preclinical models of disease. RESULTS: A link exists between ED and CVMD on several grounds: the endothelium (endothelium-derived nitric oxide and oxidative stress imbalance); smooth muscle (SM) (SM abundance and altered molecular regulation of SM contractility); autonomic innervation (autonomic neuropathy and decreased neuronal-derived nitric oxide); hormones (impaired testosterone release and actions); and metabolics (hyperlipidemia, advanced glycation end product formation). CONCLUSION: Basic science evidence supports the link between ED and CVMD. The Committee also highlighted gaps in knowledge and provided recommendations for guiding further scientific study defining this risk relationship. This endeavor serves to develop novel strategic directions for therapeutic interventions.
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 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 | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it