Several studies suggest that type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is often associated with male hypogonadism. Despite the well-known link, the role of testosterone replacement therapy (TRT) in T2DM has not been completely clarified. The aim of the present study was to analyse systematically the relationship between androgen levels and T2DM by reviewing and meta-analysing available prospective and cross-sectional studies. In addition, a specific meta-analysis on the metabolic effects of TRT in available randomized clinical trials (RCTs) was performed. An extensive Medline search was performed including the following words: 'testosterone', 'type 2 diabetes mellitus' and 'males'. Of 742 retrieved articles, 37 were included in the study. In particular 28, 5 and 3 were cross-sectional, longitudinal and interventional studies, respectively. A further unpublished RCT was retrieved from http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. T2DM patients showed significantly lower testosterone plasma levels in comparison with non-diabetic individuals. Similar results were obtained when T2DM subjects with and without erectile dysfunction were analysed separately. Meta-regression analysis demonstrated that ageing reduced, while obesity increased, these differences. However, in a multiple regression model, after adjusting for age and body mass index (BMI), T2DM was still associated with lower total testosterone (TT) levels (adjusted r = -0.568; p < 0.0001). Analysis of longitudinal studies demonstrated that baseline TT was significantly lower among patients with incident diabetes in comparison with controls (HR = -2.08[-3.57;-0.59]; p < 0.001). Combining the results of RCTs, TRT was associated with a significant reduction in fasting plasma glucose, HbA1c, fat mass and triglycerides. Conversely, no significant difference was observed for total and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, blood pressure and BMI. The meta-analysis of the available cross-sectional data suggests that T2DM can be considered independently associated with male hypogonadism. Although only few RCTs have been reported, TRT seems to improve glycometabolic control as well as fat mass in T2DM subjects.

Type 2 diabetes mellitus and testosterone: a meta-analysis study

INTRODUCTION
The role of testosterone supplementation (TS) as a treatment for male sexual dysfunction remains questionable.


AIM
The aim of this study was to attempt a meta-analysis on the effect of TS on male sexual function and its synergism with the use of phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor (PDE5i).


METHODS
An extensive Medline, Embase, and Cochrane search was performed.


MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effect of TS vs. placebo or the effect of TS as add on to PDE5is on sexual function were included. Data extraction was performed independently by two of the authors (A. M. Isidori and G. Corona), and conflicts resolved by the third investigator (M. Maggi).


RESULTS
Out of 1,702 retrieved articles, 41 were included in the study. In particular, 29 compared TS vs. placebo, whereas 12 trials evaluated the effect of TS as add on to PDE5is. TS is able to significantly ameliorate erectile function and to improve other aspects of male sexual response in hypogonadal patients. However, the presence of possible publication bias was detected. After applying "trim and fill" method, the positive effect of TS on erectile function and libido components retained significance only in RCTs partially or completely supported by pharmaceutical companies (confidence interval [0.04-0.53] and [0.12; 0.52], respectively). In addition, we also report that TS could be associated with an improvement in PDE5i outcome. These results were not confirmed in placebo-controlled studies. The majority of studies, however, included mixed eugonadal/hypogonadal subjects, thus imparting uncertainty to the statistical analyses.


CONCLUSIONS
TS plays positive effects on male sexual function in hypogonadal subjects. The role of TS is uncertain in men who are not clearly hypogonadal. The apparent difference between industry-supported and independent studies could depend on trial design more than on publication bias. New RCTs exploring the effect of TS in selected cases of PDE5i failure that persistently retain low testosterone levels are advisable.

Testosterone supplementation and sexual function: a metaanalysis study

Interest in patient involvement in research is growing. Research should rather be ‘with’ or ‘by’ patients, and not only be ‘about’ or ‘for’ patients. Patients’ active involvement in research is not self-evident and special efforts have to be made. If we make efforts towards patient involvement, it could contribute to even more relevant projects with an even greater impact. In this paper we describe the process of development of a tool to support patient involvement in research projects. The tool development was done in a co-creation of experience experts (patients and their parents/relatives) together with researchers. We used a participatory method in an iterative process comprising three consecutive stages. First, the purpose for the tool was explored, using focus groups. Second, the main ingredients and conceptualization for the tool were determined, using a narrative review. Third, the so-called Involvement Matrix was formalized and finalized using various expert panels. A conversation tool was developed, through which researchers and patients could discuss and explain their roles of involvement in a research project. This tool was formalized and visualized as a ‘matrix’. The so-called Involvement Matrix describes five roles (i.e., Listener, Co-thinker, Advisor, Partner, and Decision-maker) and three phases (i.e., Preparation, Execution, and Implementation) and includes a user’s guide. The Involvement Matrix can be used prospectively to discuss about possible roles of patients in different phases of projects, and retrospectively to discuss whether roles were carried out satisfactorily. Sharing experiences with the Involvement Matrix and evaluating its impact are the next steps in supporting patient involvement in research.

/pdf/designing-a-tool-to-support-patient-and-public-involvement-3xteeps863.pdf

Designing a tool to support patient and public involvement in research projects: the Involvement Matrix.

© 2019 The Authors Health Expectations published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd Background: Showing how engagement adds value for all stakeholders can be an effective motivator for broader implementation of patient engagement. However, it is unclear what methods can best be used to evaluate patient engagement. This paper is focused on ways to evaluate patient engagement at three decision-making points in the medicines research and development process: research priority setting, clinical trial design and early dialogues with regulators and health technology assessment bodies. Objective: Our aim was to review the literature on monitoring and evaluation of patient engagement, with a focus on indicators and methods. Search strategy and inclusion criteria: We undertook a scoping literature review using a systematic search, including academic and grey literature with a focus on evaluation approaches or outcomes associated with patient engagement. No date limits were applied other than a cut-off of publications after July 2018. Data extraction and synthesis: Data were extracted from 91 publications, coded and thematically analysed. Main results: A total of 18 benefits and 5 costs of patient engagement were identified, mapped with 28 possible indicators for their evaluation. Several quantitative and qualitative methods were found for the evaluation of benefits and costs of patient engagement. Discussion and conclusions: Currently available indicators and methods are of some use in measuring impact but are not sufficient to understand the pathway to impact, nor whether interaction between researchers and patients leads to change. We suggest that the impacts of patient engagement can best be determined not by applying single indicators, but a coherent set of measures.

/pdf/evaluating-the-return-on-patient-engagement-initiatives-in-3aikn5h0z1.pdf

Evaluating the “return on patient engagement initiatives” in medicines research and development: A literature review

In recent decades, there has been remarkable growth in scholarship examining the usefulness of community-engaged research (CEnR) and community-based participatory research (CBPR) for eliminating health inequities.This article seeks to synthesize the extant literature of systematic reviews, scoping reviews, and other related reviews regarding the context, processes, and research designs and interventions underlying CEnR that optimize its effectiveness. Through a scoping review, we have utilized an empirically derived framework of CBPR to map this literature and identify key findings and priorities for future research. Our study found 100 reviews of CEnR that largely support the CBPR conceptual framework.

https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev-publhealth-040119-094220

Partnerships, Processes, and Outcomes: A Health Equity-Focused Scoping Meta-Review of Community-Engaged Scholarship

With the growing movement to engage patients in research, questions are being asked about who is engaging patients and how they are being engaged. Internationally, research groups are supporting and funding patient-oriented research studies that engage patients in the identification of research priorities and the design, conduct and uptake of research. As we move forward, we need to know what meaningful patient engagement looks like, how it benefits research and clinical practice, and what are the barriers to patient engagement? We conducted a review of the published literature looking for trials that report engaging patients in the research. We included both randomized controlled trials and non-randomized comparative trials. We looked at these trials for important study characteristics, including how patients were engaged, to better understand the practices used in trials. Importantly, we also discuss the number of trials reporting patient engagement practices relative to all published trials. We found that very few trials report any patient engagement activities even though it is widely supported by many major funding organizations. The findings of our work will advance patient-oriented research by showing how patients can be engaged and by stressing that patient engagement practices need to be better reported. Patient-Oriented Research (POR) is research informed by patients and is centred on what is of importance to them. A fundamental component of POR is that patients are included as an integral part of the research process from conception to dissemination and implementation, and by extension, across the research continuum from basic research to pragmatic trials [J Comp Eff Res 2012, 1:181–94, JAMA 2012, 307:1587–8]. Since POR’s inception, questions have been raised as to how best to achieve this goal. We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials and non-randomized comparative trials that report engaging patients in their research. Our main goal was to describe the characteristics of published trials engaging patients in research, and to identify the extent of patient engagement activities reported in these trials. The MEDLINE®, EMBASE®, Cinahl, PsycINFO, Cochrane Methodology Registry, and Pubmed were searched from May 2011 to June 16th, 2016. Title, abstract and full text screening of all reports were conducted independently by two reviewers. Data were extracted from included trials by one reviewer and verified by a second. All trials that report patient engagement for the purposes of research were included. Of the 9490 citations retrieved, 2777 were reviewed at full text, of which 23 trials were included. Out of the 23 trials, 17 were randomized control trials, and six were non-randomized comparative trials. The majority of these trials (83%, 19/23) originated in the United States and United Kingdom. The trials engaged a range of 2-24 patients/ community representatives per study. Engagement of children and minorities occurred in 13% (3/23) and 26% (6/23) of trials; respectively. Engagement was identified in the development of the research question, the selection of study outcomes, and the dissemination and implementation of results. The prevalence of patient engagement in patient-oriented interventional research is very poor with 23 trials reporting activities engaging patients. Research dedicated to determining the best practice for meaningful engagement is still needed, but adequate reporting measures also need to be defined.

/pdf/the-prevalence-of-patient-engagement-in-published-trials-a-4te9wk7xup.pdf

The prevalence of patient engagement in published trials: a systematic review.

No evidence found for an association between trial characteristics and treatment effects in randomized trials of testosterone therapy in men: a meta-epidemiological study.

A randomized trial of an editorial intervention to reduce spin in the abstract's conclusion of manuscripts showed no significant effect.

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

Mona Ghannad

Author Tools

Chat about Author

Papers

The prevalence of patient engagement in published trials: a systematic review.

No evidence found for an association between trial characteristics and treatment effects in randomized trials of testosterone therapy in men: a meta-epidemiological study.

A randomized trial of an editorial intervention to reduce spin in the abstract's conclusion of manuscripts showed no significant effect.