Exploring the relationship between socioeconomic status and erectile dysfunction: an analysis of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey.

The aim of this study was to investigate the association between socioeconomic status and erectile dysfunction. Data were obtained from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, a nationally representative survey of the United States population. Socioeconomic status was estimated using the poverty income ratio, a ratio of family income to established poverty levels. Erectile function was assessed from a single survey question and was divided into two groups: normal (always and usually able to maintain an erection) and erectile dysfunction (sometimes or never able to maintain an erection). Multivariable logistic regression, using a multi-model approach, was used to characterize the interplay between well-established risk factors for erectile dysfunction and socioeconomic status. Our final cohort included 3679 respondents, representative of 81,255,155 subjects with a mean age of 44.4 [SE, 0.365]. Multivariable logistic regression showed that low-income respondents were significantly more likely to report erectile dysfunction [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 1.95, 95% CI 1.28-2.96; p = 0.003] compared to higher-income respondents. This study suggests that low socioeconomic status may be associated with erectile dysfunction in a large, nationally representative sample.

Race and Ethnicity Have a Significant Effect on the Disclosure of Erectile Function: An Analysis of NHANES Response Patterns.

OBJECTIVES: To determine if race/ethnicity impacts disclosure of erectile function. METHODS: Data on age, education, erectile function, and past medical history were obtained from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Response rates to a single survey question regarding erectile function were calculated and compared between race/ethnicity groups. Two subgroups were created by excluding non-responders to questions about hypertension and prostate disease to control for overall non-responsiveness and urologic health literacy. RESULTS: Our final cohort consisted of 4,694 men. Overall, 3,898 (83.0%) responded to the erectile function survey question. Race/ethnicity was a significant factor in overall response rates to the Erectile function question: 85.2% in non-hispanic white, 82.3% in non-hispanic black, 81.2% in hispanic, and 64.8% in other subjects (P<.001). Race/ethnicity remained significantly associated with responses rates among both subgroups. Multivariate logistic regression using the prostate disease subgroup showed that non-hispanic black (AOR = 2.02, 95% CI 1.01-4.03, P = .047) and hispanic (AOR = 2.18, 95% CI 1.19-4.00, P = .012) participants were significantly more likely to not disclose their erectile function compared to non-hispanic white participants after controlling for age and education. CONCLUSION: Non-hispanic black and hispanic men were significantly less likely to disclose their erectile function than non-hispanic white men in an anonymous, nationally representative survey. A better understanding of how cultural differences affect reporting of erectile function is important in improving patient care and accurately studying outcomes of urological procedures.

Analysis of Twitter Engagement in a Progressively More Competitive Urology Match: A Mixed Methods Study.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze Twitter engagement in response to the urology match during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Tweets containing the hashtags "#uromatch" or "#AUAmatch" during the 2021 and 2022 Match Week were reviewed. Date, author type and number of followers, general content, and engagement with each Tweet was collected. Differences in engagement between author type and content were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis H test. Tweet characteristics were compared between the 2021 and 2022 Match Cycles using the Chi-Square test. RESULTS: There were 656 Tweets in total, with 272 (43.5%) from 2021 and 353 (56.5%) from 2022. Medical students' and residency programs' posts received significantly more Tweet engagement than those by residents/fellows, attendings, or the AUA (P <.05). Tweets focusing on announcing a new residency class and personal announcements of match results received significantly more engagements than other content categories (P <.05). In 2022, there was a significantly higher percentage of Tweets about advice for unmatched applicants (2.2 vs 12.5; P <.001), match statistics (0.4 vs 2.9; P = .028) and focus on underrepresented groups in urology (0.7 vs 3.4; P = .029). CONCLUSION: The Twitter response to the urology match between 2021 and 2022 mirrored the increase in competitiveness, with greater participation and an increasing focus on the difficulty of matching. During Match Week, Twitter is a readily available source of information for programs, matched students, and unmatched students alike. As we continue to embrace virtual platforms, we believe that Twitter will remain a major source of match-related information and can be an instrumental tool for broader networking in our field.