Prospective investigation of penile length with newborn male circumcision and second to fourth digit ratio
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: We prospectively investigated the relationship between newborn male circumcision (NMC) and second to fourth digit ratio with penile length. METHODS: As participants for our study, we identified already circumcised young patients who visited our hospital for urological treatment. The age at which the circumcision had been done was assessed. The patients' height and weight were measured. Second to fourth digit ratio was calculated by measuring the second and fourth digit lengths. The flaccid and erectile penile lengths were measured from the base of the penis to the tip of the glans in standing position. RESULTS: A total of 248 patients were included in our study. In univariate analysis, height, second to fourth digit ratio, flaccid penile length, and age of circumcision were associated with erectile penile length. Among these variables, second to fourth digit ratio, flaccid penile length, and age of circumcision were significant predictive factors for erectile penile length in multivariate analysis. The subjects were divided into two groups, including 72 patients in the NMC group and 176 patients in the non-NMC group. No significant difference was found in height, weight, and second to fourth digit ratio between both groups. However, flaccid (p<0.001) and erectile (p=0.001) penile lengths were shorter in the NMC group than in the non-NMC group. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the small number of subjects, this study shows that NMC was associated with shorter penile length. Second to fourth digit ratio, flaccid penile length, and age of circumcision were also significant predictive factors for erectile penile length. Further multicentre studies with larger number of subjects and biochemical analyses are needed for potential clinical applicability.
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) | 0.002 | 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".