(115) Utility of Thermography as a Screening Tool for Erectile Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction Ultrasonography remains the gold standard for the evaluation of penile vasculature in men with erectile disorder. Despite its value, ultrasound assessment can be costly for patients, and requires an intracavernosal injection prior to imaging. With estimates of psychogenic ED being up to 40% or more in clinical populations, a less invasive method of quantifying penile vascular response would be beneficial in directing patients for further assessment and treatment. One such method that has potential is thermography as it requires no genital contact, can indirectly measure blood flow through temperature change, and has been validated in self-reported clinical non-clinical populations for the measurement of sexual response. Objective To determine whether thermography could be used to differentiate psychogenic from organic erectile disorder by comparing thermography to penile doppler ultrasound in men being assessed for erectile disorder. Methods 81 patients (m age = 43 years) recruited through a hospital Urology clinic completed penile vascular assessment across two different sessions: 1) thermographic measurement during a 15-minute baseline neutral and 15-minute sexually explicit film; 2) standard penile ultrasound assessment with an ICI of Prostaglandin E1. Demographic and sexual functioning questionnaires were completed, and urologist diagnosis following ultrasound assessment was used to classify patients as having psychogenic or organic ED. Results 45 patients had PSV values consistent with organic ED, while 36 patients were classified into the psychogenic ED group. Men with organic ED were significantly older than those in the psychogenic ED group (p < .05), and more likely to have concurrent health conditions (p < .05). A Repeated Measures ANOVA on temperature change measured through thermal imaging demonstrated that men with psychogenic ED had significantly greater penile temperature (m = 32.45°C, SD = 1.34) during sexual arousal than those with organic ED (m = 31.73°C, SD = 1.34; p <. 05), and also had a significantly (p < .01) stronger correlation between their self-reported and physical sexual response during thermographic assessment (psychogenic ED mean r =.49; organic ED mean r = .27). Furthermore, a hierarchical cluster analysis of thermography measures grouped patients into three distinct categories (high, medium and low temperature change), with significantly more of the psychogenic ED group being classified into the highest temperature cluster (82%). The medium and low temperature clusters were less sensitive at differentiating organic and psychogenic ED. Conclusions Thermography could provide a less costly and less invasive way to screen out patients presenting with ED who have a high degree of temperature change during sexual response. While thermography has been shown to differentiate between self-reported and clinical populations, this is the first evaluation of this instrument as a tool to differentiate within ED diagnostic groups. Although men with psychogenic ED were more likely to be classified in the highest temperature change cluster, thermography was less sensitive at differentiating organic and psychogenic ED in the middle and lower temperature groupings. Further research with larger samples would be beneficial in exploring potential clinical cutoffs for penile temperature change. Disclosure Any of the authors act as a consultant, employee or shareholder of an industry for: Dare Biosciences, Initiator Pharma.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".