High-intensity interval training (HIIT) and slow breathing interventions alleviate premature ejaculation (PE) symptoms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Physical exercise may alleviate premature ejaculation symptoms, a prevalent male sexual dysfunction linked to a series of negative outcomes for men and their partners. Objective: We investigated the effectiveness of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) and slow breathing interventions on premature ejaculation symptoms and their relation to autonomic activity and attention regulation. Method: = 3.32) with premature ejaculation completed one of the two-week interventions in their homes or as participants in a normal breathing control group; they reported their age, height, weight, physical activity level, premature ejaculation symptoms, and attention regulation. In the HIIT group, 26 participants engaged in a 7-minute HIIT each day. In the slow breathing group, 25 participants performed 7-minute slow breathing exercises per day while the 25 participants in the normal breathing group similarly performed normal breathing exercises. All participants measured their heart rate once before and five times (with one-minute intervals) after the intervention. When participants had penile-vaginal sex with their partners, they measured their heart rate once after ejaculation. Results: = 17.68 ± 3.06, 17.68 ± 3.15, and 17.44 ± 3.25). Higher levels of attention regulation were associated with fewer premature ejaculation symptoms. We also found that a larger increase in heart rate from resting to after sex was associated with fewer premature ejaculation symptoms. Conclusion: Compared to the control group, the efficacy of two weeks of HIIT exercise in mitigating PE symptoms suggests its potential as a novel treatment for PE.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".