CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 116Sexual function and dysfunction studiesUrological Disorders and TreatmentsHormonal and reproductive studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 76 of the 80 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Erectile Dysfunction: An Umbrella Review of Meta-Analyses of Risk-Factors, Treatment, and Prevalence Outcomes

Allen, Mark S., Walter, Emma E.·2019·The Journal of Sexual Medicine
DOI 10.1016/j.jsxm.2019.01.314
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Erectile dysfunction (ED) is a major health care problem that has implications for quality of life. AIM: This umbrella review sought to synthesize all meta-analytic research on risk factors, treatment, and prevalence of ED. METHODS: 8 electronic databases were searched for relevant meta-analyses in June 2018. The evidence was graded with 2 measures that use quantitative criteria to establish the quality of report writing and confidence in the effect size reported. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Lifestyle factors, genetic markers, medical conditions, treatments. RESULTS: In total, 98 meta-analyses were identified that included 421 meta-analytic effects, 4,188 primary-effects, and 3,971,122 participants. Pooled estimates showed that an unhealthy lifestyle, genetic markers, and medical conditions were associated with an increased risk of ED. Testosterone therapy and phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors showed the greatest treatment efficacy, with mild adverse events observed across treatments. Psychological and behavior change interventions produced effect sizes that were comparable to medication but had greater imprecision in effect sizes. There was little evidence that combined treatments were more efficacious than single treatments. Meta-analyses of prevalence estimates showed consistent age trends but were limited to particular regions or clinical samples, meaning that global estimates of ED are difficult to determine. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The umbrella review synthesized findings for many treatment options that might aid evidence-based clinical decision-making. Based on prevalence estimates, we recommend that primary care physicians take a proactive approach and enquire about erectile problems in all men over age 40 displaying any health-related issue (eg, overweight, cigarette smoking). STRENGTHS & LIMITATIONS: Strengths include the calculation and comparison of summary estimates across multiple meta-analyses. Limitations include heterogeneity in research quality across research themes limiting effect size comparisons. CONCLUSION: The review provides summary estimates for 37 risk factors and 28 treatments. Meta-analyses of risk factors often did not control for important confounders, and meta-analyses of randomized trials were not exclusive to double-blinded trials, active placebo controls, or tests of long-term effects. We recommend further meta-analyses that eliminate lower quality studies and further primary research on behavioral and combined treatments. Allen MS, Walter EE. Erectile Dysfunction: An Umbrella Review of Meta-Analyses of Risk-Factors, Treatment, and Prevalence Outcomes. J Sex Med 2019;16:531-541.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jsxm.2019.01.314

Cites

76 of 76 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

4 of the 80 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 116

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Allen, M. S., & Walter, E. E.
Affiliations
University of Wollongong (AU)
Corresponding author
Allen, Mark S.
ORCID
Venue
The Journal of Sexual Medicine
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2019-03-01
Volume
16
Issue
4
Pages
531-541
ISSN
  • 1743-6095 (ISSN-L)
  • 1743-6109
DOI
10.1016/j.jsxm.2019.01.314
OpenAlex
W2920406111
Cited by
116
References
80
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 5
FWCI
2.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • The Journal of Sexual Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Online (University of Wollongong) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Sexual function and dysfunction studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Urology › Urological Disorders and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Hormonal and reproductive studies
Keywords
erectile dysfunction, risk factors, erectile dysfunction treatment, testosterone replacement therapy, phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors, lifestyle factors, genetic markers, health conditions, psychological intervention, behavioral interventions, combination therapy, adverse events, quality of evidence, primary care screening
MeSH terms
Combined Modality Therapy, Humans, Erectile Dysfunction, Life Style, Male, Quality of Life, Risk Factors, Prevalence, Treatment Outcome, Phosphodiesterase 5 Inhibitors

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