Erectile Dysfunction in Men With Psoriatic Arthritis: A Population-based Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To define the incidence of erectile dysfunction (ED) in a population-based cohort of men with psoriatic arthritis (PsA). METHODS: Data pertaining to demographics, ED, and potential confounding diagnosis were extracted from a comprehensive medical record system for a population-based cohort of men with PsA and an age-matched male comparator cohort. Cumulative incidence of ED adjusted for competing risk of death was compared between the 2 cohorts. RESULTS: = 0.16). After PsA diagnosis/index date, diagnosis with PsA was associated with an increased risk of ED (age-adjusted HR 1.45, 95% CI 0.79-2.68), but this association did not reach statistical significance. This was based on 24 cases of ED in the men with PsA and 18 cases within the comparator cohort. No confounding factors or ED treatment strategies differed significantly between men with PsA and ED and comparators with ED. CONCLUSION: Men with PsA may have an increased risk of ED, which was detected but likely underpowered in this study. Whether this difference is secondary to higher prevalence of traditional risk factors of ED in men with PsA compared to the general population will require further study.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".