Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 299

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 45 of the 45 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Prediction of Cardiovascular Events and All-Cause Mortality With Erectile Dysfunction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cohort Studies

Open access
Vlachopoulos, Charalambos V., Terentes-Printzios, Dimitrios G., Ioakeimidis, Nikolaos K., Aznaouridis, Konstantinos A., Stefanadis, Christodoulos I.·2013·Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes
DOI 10.1161/circoutcomes.112.966903
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background—: Erectile dysfunction (ED) carries an independent risk for cardiovascular (CV) events. We conducted a meta-analysis of all longitudinal studies for determining the ability of ED to predict risk of clinical events and to dissect factors influencing this ability. Methods and Results—: We conducted a comprehensive search of electronic databases through July 2012. Longitudinal studies that reported relative risk (RR) estimates with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were included. Of the 14 studies included (92 757 participants; mean follow-up, 6.1 years; 16 articles), 13 (14 articles) reported results on total CV events (91 831 individuals), 4 on CV mortality (34 761 individuals), 4 on myocardial infarction (35 523 individuals), 6 on cerebrovascular events (27 689 individuals), and 5 on all-cause mortality (17 869 individuals). The pooled RRs for the above-mentioned end points were 1.44 (95% CI, 1.27–1.63), 1.19 (95% CI, 0.97–1.46), 1.62 (95% CI, 1.34–1.96), 1.39 (95% CI, 1.23–1.57), and 1.25 (95% CI, 1.12–1.39), respectively, for men with versus without ED. The RR was higher in intermediate- compared with high- or low-CV-risk populations and with younger age. The RR for studies that diagnosed ED with the use of a questionnaire compared with a single question was higher (RR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.38–1.86 versus RR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.18–1.37, respectively; P =0.006). Conclusions—: ED is associated with increased risk of CV events and all-cause mortality. RR is higher at younger ages, in intermediate-risk groups, and when a questionnaire is used instead of a single question.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/circoutcomes.112.966903

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 45 references

Cited by

See all 299

Metadata

Authors
Vlachopoulos, C. V., Terentes-Printzios, D. G., Ioakeimidis, N. K., Aznaouridis, K. A., & Stefanadis, C. I.
Venue
Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
2013-01
Volume
6
Issue
1
Pages
99-109
ISSN
  • 1941-7705 (ISSN-L)
  • 1941-7713
DOI
10.1161/circoutcomes.112.966903
OpenAlex
W2144807876
Cited by
299
References
45
FWCI
25.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Prediction of Cardiovascular Events and All-Cause Mortality With Erectile Dysfunction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cohort Studies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/circoutcomes.112.966903
The paper
Vlachopoulos, C. V., Terentes-Printzios, D. G., Ioakeimidis, N. K., Aznaouridis, K. A., & Stefanadis, C. I. (2013). Prediction of Cardiovascular Events and All-Cause Mortality With Erectile Dysfunction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cohort Studies. Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes. https://doi.org/10.1161/circoutcomes.112.966903

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.