Erectile Dysfunction and Cardiovascular Risk in Men With Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Population-based Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Both erectile dysfunction (ED) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are associated with increased cardiovascular (CV) risk. It is unknown if these diagnoses are associated or if their combination confers additional CV risk. We aimed to define the incidence of ED in RA, and to determine if ED correlates with increased CV risk in RA. METHODS: Medical information concerning RA, ED, and CV diagnoses for men with RA (n = 260) diagnosed in Olmsted County, Minnesota, and age-matched male comparators was extracted from a comprehensive medical record system. RESULTS: ED incidence was similar between the RA cohort and comparators (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.55-1.16). In men with RA, ED diagnosis was associated with a trend toward an increase in peripheral arterial disease (HR 2.22, 95% CI 0.98-5.03) and a significantly decreased rate of myocardial infarction (HR 0.26, 95% CI 0.07-0.90), heart failure (HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.25-0.94), and death (HR 0.56; 95% CI 0.36-0.87). In men with RA and ED, phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor use was associated with a decreased risk of death (HR 0.35, 95% CI 0.16-0.79), with a trending decreased risk of some CV diagnoses. CONCLUSION: Incidence of ED was not statistically increased in RA. Although patients with both RA and ED had a similar overall CV risk to those with RA alone, men with both RA and ED had decreased risk of heart failure, myocardial infarction, and death, as well as an increased risk of peripheral arterial disease. Further studies are needed to clarify these associations and their implications for pathogenesis and therapeutics.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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".