A survey of adult men who underwent circumcision in childhood for pathological phimosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Pathological phimosis in childhood typically results in circumcision. Long-term follow-up data for men circumcised in childhood are lacking. This study sought long-term data regarding satisfaction with circumcision and voiding symptoms from men who had childhood circumcision between 1989 and 2010. Methods: Following ethical approval, a postal survey was sent to males > 17 years who underwent circumcision at an age < 16 years for pathological phimosis. Results: The survey was sent to 177 men, 23 completed surveys were returned [19 histology proven Lichen Sclerosus [LS, BXO], 4 chronic balanitis]. Mean age at circumcision was 9.7 years [range 3-15], at survey 23.5 years [18-37]. Seven [all > 9 years] remembered the decision for circumcision. Four warranted urologist review as adults, three required surgery for voiding symptoms and one still performs structure therapy; all had LS. When asked which treatment option[s] they would have considered; ten of them chose circumcision, nine of them chose preputioplasty, eight of them chose topical creams [two of them chose all three options, one man chose both foreskin preserving options]. Eight agreed with the statement ''Having a circumcision in childhood or adolescence had an impact on my adult life''; this was positive in two men but negative in five men-they wouldn't have chosen circumcision. Conclusions: The response rate to the survey was low, making it difficult to draw firm conclusions. However, even in this limited sample, not all men would choose childhood circumcision for pathological phimosis, data supporting the need for larger studies of alternative treatment options. In addition, some men circumcised for childhood LS had significant voiding difficulties in adulthood.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".