Correlation in Severity Between Glaucoma and Erectile Dysfunction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To examine the association between open-angle glaucoma and erectile dysfunction (ED), and investigate the correlation in severity between these 2 conditions. METHODS: Cross-sectional study with patient questionnaire and retrospective chart review. A total of 167 male patients over 40 years of age who attended ophthalmology clinic visits in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, participated in the study by providing written consent and responding to the survey. Patients with previous radiation or surgical prostate treatment were excluded, leaving final sample sizes of 61 glaucoma patients and 67 control patients. Presence and severity of ED was determined using a validated patient questionnaire (the International Index of Erectile Function questionnaire). Presence of glaucoma was based on previous clinical diagnosis, and severity was graded based on visual field index using a 30-2 visual field test with the SITA Standard protocol. Bivariate analysis examined the presence of ED in glaucoma patients versus controls. Risk factors including dyslipidemia, diabetes, hypertension, and smoking were adjusted for using multiple logistic regression. The association between glaucoma and ED severity was assessed with correlation and scatterplot analysis. RESULTS: Glaucoma was found to be a significant risk factor for ED in our population, with an odds ratio of 2.58 (95% confidence interval, 1.15-5.83). Severity of glaucoma and ED were significantly correlated (r=0.365, P=0.007). CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate that there is a positive association between the presence of ED and the diagnosis of glaucoma and a positive association between the severity of ED and the severity of glaucoma.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".