This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

51/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100. Caregiving

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Objective To evaluate the global prevalence of erectile dysfunction (ED); as well as its association with physiological and pathological ageing by examining the relationship between ED and cardiovascular disease (CVD), benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), and dementia. We also aimed to characterise discrepancies caused by the use of different ED screening tools. Methods The Excerpta Medica dataBASE (EMBASE) and Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE) were searched to find population-based studies investigating the prevalence of ED and the association between ED and CVD, BPH, and dementia in the general population. Results The global prevalence of ED was 3-76.5%. ED was associated with increasing age. Use of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) and Massachusetts Male Aging Study (MMAS)-derived questionnaire identified a high prevalence of ED in young men. ED was positively associated with CVD. Men with ED have an increased risk of all-cause mortality odds ratio (OR) 1.26 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.57), as well as CVD mortality OR 1.43 (95% CI 1.00-2.05). Men with ED are 1.33-6.24-times more likely to have BPH then men without ED, and 1.68-times more likely to develop dementia than men without ED. Conclusion ED screening tools in population-based studies are a major source of discrepancy. Non-validated questionnaires may be less sensitive than the IIEF and MMAS-derived questionnaire. ED constitutes a large burden on society given its high prevalence and impact on quality of life, and is also a risk factor for CVD, dementia, and all-cause mortality.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Kessler, A., Sollie, S., Challacombe, B., Briggs, K., & Van Hemelrijck, M. (2019). The global prevalence of erectile dysfunction: a review. BJU international. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.14813

Vancouver

Kessler A, Sollie S, Challacombe B, Briggs K, Van Hemelrijck M. The global prevalence of erectile dysfunction: a review. BJU international. 2019. doi:10.1111/bju.14813. PMID: 31267639.

BibTeX

@article{kessler2019-31267639,
  author  = {Kessler, A. and Sollie, S. and Challacombe, B. and Briggs, K. and Van Hemelrijck, M.},
  title   = {{The global prevalence of erectile dysfunction: a review}},
  journal = {BJU international},
  year    = {2019},
  doi     = {10.1111/bju.14813},
  pmid    = {31267639},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.14813}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

Key findings

Results The global prevalence of ED was 3-76.5%.
Men with ED have an increased risk of all-cause mortality odds ratio (OR) 1.26 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.57), as well as CVD mortality OR 1.43 (95% CI 1.00-2.05).

Why it matters

This review found that men with erectile dysfunction were 1.68 times more likely to develop dementia than men without it, and that erectile dysfunction was associated with increasing age and cardiovascular disease. The authors note that differences in screening tools used across studies are a major source of discrepancy in prevalence estimates.

New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Caregiving →

Study details

Effect size76.5%; OR 1.43 (95% CI 1.00-2.05)
Evidence strengthLow

How this study scored 51/100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, so that was left out: it earned 49 of the 96 points we could judge it on, which is 51 out of 100.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (BJU international)
Journal's citation record	— / 4	No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design	0 / 12	No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Strength of evidence	1 / 5	Rated “low” in our summary
Peer-review validation	10 / 10	Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent	2 / 5	2019 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size	0 / 4	Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Effect reported	3 / 3	Effect reported with a statistic (interval, p-value, ratio or similar)
Studied in people	0 / 3	Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Randomised / blinded	0 / 2	No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited	6 / 7	Cited 358 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year	4 / 5	39.8 citations a year over 9 year(s) since 2019
Impact for its field and year	5 / 6	Cited 20.9× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here	0 / 6	No other study in this library cites it
Still being cited	3 / 4	Cited 177 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record	3 / 4	Last-listed author Mieke Van Hemelrijck: h-index 63 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record	1 / 3	King's College London: institution h-index 1,348 (OpenAlex)
Multi-centre collaboration	2 / 3	OpenAlex lists 4 institution(s) in 1 country
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 31267639)
Free to read	0 / 2	Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points	49 / 96	Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 49 of the 96 points we could judge it on is 51 out of 100.
Total	51 / 100	—

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).

Related studies in Caregiving

Also in Caregiving

70 studies in the library are filed under Caregiving with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Caregiving hub.

Similar studies

More on Caregiving

See all studies in Caregiving →