Cited by 40Sexual function and dysfunction studiesUrological Disorders and TreatmentsSexuality, Behavior, and Technology

The 2018 Revision to the Process of Care Model for Evaluation of Erectile Dysfunction

Mulhall, John P., Giraldi, Annamaria, Hackett, Geoff, Hellstrom, Wayne J.G., Jannini, Emmanuele A., Rubio-Aurioles, Eusebio, Trost, Landon, Hassan, Tarek A.·2018·The Journal of Sexual Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Erectile dysfunction (ED) is a common condition that may affect men of all ages; in 1999, a Process of Care Model was developed to provide clinicians with recommendations regarding the evaluation and management of ED. AIM: To reflect the evolution of the study of ED since 1999, this update to the process of care model presents health care providers with a tool kit to facilitate patient interactions, comprehensive evaluation, and counseling for ED. METHODS: A cross-disciplinary panel of international experts met to propose updates to the 1999 process of care model from a global perspective. The updated model was designed to be evidence-based, data-driven, and accessible to a wide range of health care providers. OUTCOMES: This article summarizes the resulting discussion of the expert meeting and focuses on ED evaluation. The management of ED is discussed in an article by Muhall et al (J Sex Med 2018;15:1280-1292). RESULTS: A comprehensive approach to the evaluation of ED is warranted because ED may involve both psychological and organic components. The updated process of care model for evaluation was divided into core and optional components and now focuses on the combination of first-line pharmacotherapy and counseling in consideration of patient sexual dynamics. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Patient evaluation for ED should encompass a variety of aspects, including medical history, sexual history, physical examination, psychological evaluation, laboratory testing, and possibly adjunctive testing. STRENGTHS & LIMITATIONS: This update draws on author expertise and experience to provide multi-faceted guidance for the evaluation of ED in a modern context. Although a limited number of contributors provided input on the update, these experts represent diverse fields that encounter patients with ED. Additionally, no meta-analyses were performed to further support the ED evaluation guidelines presented. CONCLUSION: Comprehensive evaluation of ED affords health care providers an opportunity to address medical, psychological/psycho-social, and sexual issues associated with ED, with the ultimate goal being effective management and possibly resolution of ED. While some or all techniques described in the updated model may be needed for each patient, evaluation should in all cases be thorough. Mulhall JP, Giraldi A, Hackett G, et al. The 2018 Revision to the Process of Care Model for Evaluation of Erectile Dysfunction. J Sex Med 2018;15:1280-1292.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jsxm.2018.06.005

Cites

99 of 99 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

9 of the 108 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mulhall, J. P., Giraldi, A., Hackett, G., Hellstrom, W. J. G., Jannini, E. A., Rubio-Aurioles, E., Trost, L., & Hassan, T. A.
Affiliations
  • Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (US)
  • University of Copenhagen (DK)
  • Aston University Birmingham , Birmingham , United Kingdom
  • Tulane University (US)
  • University of Rome Tor Vergata (IT)
  • Asociación Mexicana para la Salud Sexual A.C. (AMSSAC), La Joya , Mexico City , Mexico
  • Mayo Clinic (US)
  • Pfizer (United States) (US)
Corresponding author
Mulhall, John P.
Venue
The Journal of Sexual Medicine
Published
2018-07-26
Volume
15
Issue
9
Pages
1280-1292
ISSN
  • 1743-6095 (ISSN-L)
  • 1743-6109
OpenAlex
W2884841306
Cited by
40
References
108
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 6
FWCI
3.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Journal of Sexual Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Pfizer Inc. Editorial
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Sexual function and dysfunction studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Urology › Urological Disorders and Treatments
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Sexuality, Behavior, and Technology
Keywords
erectile dysfunction, psychological assessment, sexual counseling, first-line pharmacotherapy, sexual history, laboratory testing
MeSH terms
Humans, Erectile Dysfunction, Male, Models, Theoretical

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review