Methods for a rapid systematic review and metaanalysis in evaluating selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors for premature ejaculation
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate a rapid systematic review method in which randomised controlled trial (RCT) data was extracted from existing reviews and subsequent RCTs. The method enabled: identification of RCTs not included by existing reviews; cross-checking RCT data for consistency where there was more than one review; double data extraction due to time saved by extracting data from existing reviews; correction of data synthesis errors in existing reviews; and pooling data across all RCTs to produce contemporary effect estimates. When subsequently compared to extracting data directly from all RCT original publications, the findings and conclusions concurred.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
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?
A case study found that extracting data directly from existing systematic reviews saved time and did not change the review results.
“According to a case study, this approach saved time and did not alter the review results.52”
From Updated recommendations for the Cochrane rapid review methods guidance for rapid reviews of effectiveness (2024) · cites this paper as [52]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 49 · Cited by 9
Research works printed but not linked: 12
- Ahn, T.Y. et al 1996. Fluoxetine as a Treatment for Premature Ejaculation: A Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Study. Korean Journal of Urology , 37, 926-931
- Chambers, D. & Wilson, P. 2012. A framework for production of systematic review based briefings to support evidence-informed decision-making. Systematic Reviews , 1, (32) doi: 10.1186/2046-4053-132 available from: PM:22775986 · DOI
- Culba, M. et al 2008. Comparison of fluoxetine vs. fluoxetine plus tadalafil in the treatment of premature ejaculation - a double blind, placebo control study. Journal of Sexual Medicine , 5, 60-61 available from: WOS:000252756300050
- Haensel, S.M. et al 1998. Fluoxetine and premature ejaculation: a double-blind, crossover, placebocontrolled study. Journal of clinical psychopharmacology , 18, (1) 72-77
- Kara, H. et al 1996. The efficacy of fluoxetine in the treatment of premature ejaculation: a doubleblind placebo controlled study. The Journal of urology , 156, (5) 1631-1632
- Khangura, S. et al 2012. Evidence summaries: the evolution of a rapid review approach. Systematic Reviews , 1, (10) doi: 10.1186/2046-4053-1-10 available from: PM:22587960 · DOI · Paper page
- Lee, W.K. et al 2012. Comparison between on-demand dosing of dapoxetine alone and dapoxetine plus mirodenafil in patients with premature ejaculation; prospective, randomized, doubleblind, and placebo-controlled. Journal of Sexual Medicine , 9, 203-204
- Nada, E.A. et al 2009. The use of escitalopram in treatment of patients with premature ejaculation: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Journal of Sexual Medicine , 6, 182
- Nada, E.A. et al 2012. A comparison between citalopram and escitalopram in treatment of patients with premature ejaculation: A double-blind controlled clinical study. Journal of Sexual Medicine , 9, 261-262
- Waldinger, M.D. et al 1998. Effect of SSRI antidepressants on ejaculation: a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study with fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, paroxetine, and sertraline. Journal of clinical psychopharmacology , 18, (4) 274-281
- Wang, Y.b. et al 2010. [Dapoxetine in treatment of premature ejaculation: a systematic review]. Beijing da xue xue bao.Yi xue ban = Journal of Peking University.Health sciences , 42, (4) 425-432
- Weixing, Z. et al 2012. Effect evaluation of Paroxetine and Sertraline in the treatment of premature ejaculation. Chinese Journal of Andrology , 26, (1) 41-43
- Authors
- James, M. M.-S., Cooper, K., & Kaltenthaler, E.
- Affiliations
- University of Sheffield (GB)
- Venue
- Evidence and Policy
- Publisher
- Bristol University Press
- Published
- 2017-08
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 517-538
- ISSN
- 1744-2648 (ISSN-L)
- 1744-2656
- OpenAlex
- W2498730103
- Cited by
- 9
- References
- 49
- Citations by year
- 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2016: 2
- FWCI
- 0.94
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Evidence & Policy (publishedVersion)
- White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Clinical practice guidelines implementation
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Delphi Technique in Research
- Keywords
- meta-analysis, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, premature ejaculation, effect estimates, randomized controlled trials
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
