Cited by 215Sexual function and dysfunction studiesGenital Health and DiseaseUrological Disorders and Treatments

Am I normal? A systematic review and construction of nomograms for flaccid and erect penis length and circumference in up to 15 521 men

Veale, David, Miles, Sarah, Bramley, Sally, Muir, Gordon, Hodsoll, John·2015·BJU International

Abstract

Objective To systematically review and create nomograms of flaccid and erect penile size measurements. Methods Study key eligibility criteria: measurement of penis size by a health professional using a standard procedure; a minimum of 50 participants per sample. Exclusion criteria samples with a congenital or acquired penile abnormality, previous surgery, complaint of small penis size or erectile dysfunction. Synthesis methods: calculation of a weighted mean and pooled standard deviation (SD) and simulation of 20,000 observations from the normal distribution to generate nomograms of penis size. Results Nomograms for flaccid pendulous [n = 10,704, mean (SD) 9.16 (1.57) cm] and stretched length [n = 14,160, mean (SD) 13.24 (1.89) cm], erect length [n = 692, mean (SD) 13.12 (1.66) cm], flaccid circumference [n = 9407, mean (SD) 9.31 (0.90) cm], and erect circumference [n = 381, mean (SD) 11.66 (1.10) cm] were constructed. Consistent and strongest significant correlation was between flaccid stretched or erect length and height, which ranged from r = 0.2 to 0.6. Limitations relatively few erect measurements were conducted in a clinical setting and the greatest variability between studies was seen with flaccid stretched length. Conclusions Penis size nomograms may be useful in clinical and therapeutic settings to counsel men and for academic research.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/bju.13010

Cites

51 of 51 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Veale, D., Miles, S., Bramley, S., Muir, G., & Hodsoll, J.
Affiliations
  • South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
  • The Institute of Psychiatry Psychology and Neuroscience London UK
  • King's College London (GB)
  • King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
Corresponding author
Veale, David
Venue
BJU International
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-03-02
Volume
115
Issue
6
Pages
978-986
ISSN
  • 1464-4096 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-410X
OpenAlex
W1589660493
Cited by
213
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 11
FWCI
2.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • British Journal of Urology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre at South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust and King’s College London
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Sexual function and dysfunction studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Genital Health and Disease
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Urology › Urological Disorders and Treatments
Keywords
penile size, penile circumference, nomogram, reference values
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Anthropometry, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Organ Size, Penile Erection, Penis, Reference Values, Nomograms, Young Adult

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