MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2303275197 · doi:10.1016/j.jsxm.2016.01.016

Pharmacotherapy for Erectile Dysfunction: Recommendations From the Fourth International Consultation for Sexual Medicine (ICSM 2015)

2016· review· en· W2303275197 on OpenAlexaff
Konstantinos Hatzimouratidis, Andrea Salonia, Ganesan Adaikan, Serge Carrier, Amr El-Meliegy, Andrew McCullough, Luiz Otávio Torres, Mohit Khera

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Sexual Medicine · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSexual medicineErectile dysfunctionPharmacotherapySexual dysfunctionMedicineSex therapyPsychiatryClinical psychologyPsychologyFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Treatment of erectile dysfunction is based on pharmacotherapy for most patients. AIM: To review the current data on pharmacotherapy for erectile dysfunction based on efficacy, psychosocial outcomes, and safety outcomes. METHODS: A review of the literature was undertaken by the committee members. All related articles were critically analyzed and discussed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Levels of evidence (LEs) and grades of recommendations (GRs) are provided based on a thorough analysis of the literature and committee consensus. RESULTS: Ten recommendations are provided. (i) Phosphodiesterase type 5 (PDE5) inhibitors are effective, safe, and well-tolerated therapies for the treatment of men with erectile dysfunction (LE = 1, GR = A). (ii) There are no significant differences in efficacy, safety, and tolerability among PDE5 inhibitors (LE = 1, GR = A). (iii) PDE5 inhibitors are first-line therapy for most men with erectile dysfunction who do not have a specific contraindication to their use (LE = 3, GR = C). (iv) Intracavernosal injection therapy with alprostadil is an effective and well-tolerated treatment for men with erectile dysfunction (LE = 1, GR = A). (v) Intracavernosal injection therapy with alprostadil should be offered to patients as second-line therapy for erectile dysfunction (LE = 3, GR = C). (vi) Intraurethral and topical alprostadil are effective and well-tolerated treatments for men with erectile dysfunction (LE = 1, GR = A). (vii) Intraurethral and topical alprostadil should be considered second-line therapy for erectile dysfunction if available (LE = 3, GR = C). (viii) Dose titration of PDE5 inhibitors to the maximum tolerated dose is strongly recommended because it increases efficacy and satisfaction from treatment (LE = 2, GR = A). (ix) Treatment selection and follow-up should address the psychosocial profile and the needs and expectations of a patient for his sexual life. Shared decision making with the patient (and his partner) is strongly recommended (LE = 2, GR = A). (x) Counterfeit medicines are potentially dangerous. It is strongly recommended that physicians educate their patients to avoid taking any medication from unauthorized sources (LE = 2, GR = A). The first seven recommendations are the same as those from the Third International Consultation for Sexual Medicine and the last three are new recommendations. CONCLUSION: PDE5 inhibitors remain a first-line treatment option because of their excellent efficacy and safety profile. This class of drugs is continually developed with new molecules and new formulations. Intracavernosal injections continue to be an established treatment modality, and intraurethral and topical alprostadil provide an alternative, less invasive treatment option.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.120

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.006
Bibliometrics0.0090.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0080.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.005

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 head0.180
GPT teacher head0.458
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations245
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Sexual MedicineSame topicSexual function and dysfunction studiesFrench-language works237,207