Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Mental health conditions (MHCs) are established risk factors for the development of erectile dysfunction (ED), yet it is unclear whether ED patients are accessing MHC care.The objectives of this study were to assess the proportion of men under 40 years old with an MHC diagnosis within five years of their ED diagnosis and characterize their interactions with psychiatric and psychological subspecialists within that timeframe.Methods: A retrospective review was performed using The Ottawa Hospital's data from June 1, 2019, to June 1, 2025.Male patients aged 18-40 years at the index date of their ED diagnosis were included.MHCs were defined as any DSM-5 diagnosis and related terms.Outcomes included demographics, prevalence of MHCs, and rates of referrals/appointments for psychiatry/psychology services.Results: Overall, 535 patients were included, with a median age at ED diagnosis of 32.4 years, BMI of 27, 5.35% (n=19) with uncomplicated diabetes, and 0.85% (n=3) with complicated diabetes.Of these, 15.14% (n=81) were diagnosed with an MHC within five years before/after their ED index date.Of those with an MHC, 28.4% (n=23) received a psychiatry referral (14.81% [n=12] before and 13.58% [n=11] after their ED diagnosis).Only 6.17% (n=5) of those with an MHC had a psychiatry appointment, all of which were prior to their ED diagnosis.Psychology referrals were received by 13.58% (n=11) of those with an MHC (8.64% [n=7] before and 4.94% [n=4] after their ED diagnosis).Conversely, 22.22% (n=18) of those with an MHC had a psychology appointment (14.81% [n=12] before and 7.41% [n=6] after their ED diagnosis).Conclusions: Patients consistently had more interaction with mental health specialists prior to their ED diagnosis, suggesting MHCs may potentially contribute to ED onset.These findings highlight a significant gap in post-diagnosis mental healthcare access, emphasizing the need to integrate psychological and psychiatric support into ED management for young men.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.700 | 0.434 |
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".