Cited by 39Sexual function and dysfunction studiesUrological Disorders and TreatmentsDupuytren's Contracture and Treatments

Concordance between patient and physician assessment of the magnitude of Peyronie's disease curvature

Matsushita, Kazuhito, Stember, Doron S., Nelson, Christian J., Mulhall, John P.·2014·The Journal of Sexual Medicine

Abstract

Introduction The magnitude of penile deformity is a critically important factor in Peyronie's disease, as it is associated with increased difficulty in penetrative sexual intercourse and in turn with negative psychosocial consequences. Deformity magnitude also influences treatment choice when surgical correction is indicated. Aim To determine the concordance between patient and physician assessment of magnitude of penile curvature in men with Peyronie's disease. Methods Patient assessment of curvature was obtained at initial interview. Physician assessment was performed using intracavernosal injection-assisted erection using a goniometer applied during excellent penile rigidity. Main outcome measures Patient and physician assessments of penile curvature. Results The sample consisted of 192 men with a mean age of 54 ± 12 years old. Mean curvature on patient and physician assessment was 33 ± 17 and 36 ± 18 degrees, respectively. Only 49% of patients (94) correctly assessed their curvature, whereas 35% underestimated and 16% overestimated it. Conclusions Only half of PD patients accurately assess their penile curvature, with more than twice as many patients underestimating it than overestimating it. These data suggest that patient self-reporting of penile curvature should not be used as a clinical marker or end point in Peyronie's disease trials.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/jsm.12337

Cites

2 of 2 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?

  • The EAU, CUA, and ISSM emphasize the concept of a functionally straight penis, within 20 degrees of straight rather than arrow straight.

    “The EAU, CUA, and ISSM panels specifically emphasize the concept of a “functionally” straight penis (i.e. within 20o of straight as opposed to “arrow” straight).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Matsushita, K., Stember, D. S., Nelson, C. J., & Mulhall, J. P.
Affiliations
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (US)
Corresponding author
Mulhall, John P.
Venue
The Journal of Sexual Medicine
Published
2014-01-01
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
205-210
ISSN
  • 1743-6095 (ISSN-L)
  • 1743-6109
OpenAlex
W1949408699
Cited by
39
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 2
FWCI
2.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Journal of Sexual Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Sexual function and dysfunction studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Urology › Urological Disorders and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Dupuytren's Contracture and Treatments
Keywords
Peyronie's disease, penile curvature, patient-physician concordance, patient self-assessment, goniometry, psychosocial consequences, surgical treatment decision
MeSH terms
Aged, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Patients, Penile Erection, Penile Induration, Penis, Physicians, Diagnostic Self Evaluation, Symptom Assessment

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