MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2561666977 · doi:10.1016/j.jsxm.2016.11.062

109 Evaluation of a FDA and Health Canada Compliant Novel Medical Device for Improving Erectile Function Across Erectile Dysfunction Etiologies

2016· article· en· W2561666977 on OpenAlexaffabout
A.M. Littlemore, L. Laing, Anthony J Bella

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Sexual Medicine · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsHealth CanadaUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsErectile dysfunctionPeyronie's diseaseErectile functionEtiologyMedicineOcclusionSexual functionUrologySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We sought to evaluate a new FDA and Health Canada compliant medical device consisting of a soft silicone occlusion loop (SSOL) with geodesigned anchoring in a cross-section of men. The SSOL design is novel, offering a unique means of loop fixing compared to traditional penile occlusion bands (POB) or c*ck rings (CR). We identified complimentary force vectors to circular constriction applied by the anchoring mechanism and theorized that this may optimize venous trapping in CVOD ED. Finally, the design of the SSOL is less obtrusive to the man and his partner, and does not impact external genitalia of the partner, which may make acceptance as a sexual function (SF) enhancement device for intimacy easier. SSOLs were obtained in January 2016. Groups using POB/CR, PDE5i use for ED contributed to most likely by CVOD, Peyronie's disease (PyD) less than 45 degrees responsive to PDE-5i or ICI (buckling segment or maximum EHS score 3 with PDE5i.), and men considered to have “normal” erectile function but seeking improved function, were offered SSOLs. Standard operating procedures in the clinic include IIEF-15, IPSS, and if applicable, PDQ/Pyd questionnaires. In-office teaching of ICI as well as the SSOL is strictly adhered to.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.124

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0300.002

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 head0.168
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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