↓ Skip to main content

Herbal Dietary Supplements for Erectile Dysfunction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Drugs, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#26 of 3,472)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
17 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
7 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
92 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Herbal Dietary Supplements for Erectile Dysfunction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Published in
Drugs, April 2018
DOI 10.1007/s40265-018-0897-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Francesca Borrelli, Cristiano Colalto, Domenico V. Delfino, Marcello Iriti, Angelo A. Izzo

Abstract

Erectile dysfunction (ED) is a common condition that significantly affects quality of life and interpersonal relationships. Our objective was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of herbal dietary supplements in the treatment of ED. We searched five databases to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the clinical efficacy of herbal medicines in ED. Quality was assessed and risk of bias was estimated using the Jadad score and the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. In total, 24 RCTs, including 2080 patients with ED, were identified. Among these, 12 evaluated monopreparations (five ginseng [n = 399], three saffron [n = 397], two Tribulus terrestris [n = 202], and one each Pinus pinaster [n = 21] and Lepidium meyenii [n = 50]), seven evaluated formulations (n = 544), and five investigated dietary supplements in combination with pure compounds (n = 410). Ginseng significantly improved erectile function (International Index of Erectile Function [IIEF]-5 score: 140 ginseng, 96 placebo; standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.43; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.15-0.70; P < 0.01; I2 = 0), P. pinaster and L. meyenii showed very preliminary positive results, and saffron and T. terrestris treatment produced mixed results. Several herbal formulations were associated with a decrease of IIEF-5 or IIEF-15, although the results were preliminary. The quality of the included studies varied, with only seven having a prevalent low risk of bias. The median methodological quality Jadad score was three out of a maximum of five. Adverse events were recorded in 19 of 24 trials, with no significant differences between placebo and verum in placebo-controlled studies. Encouraging evidence suggests that ginseng may be an effective herbal treatment for ED. However, further, larger, and high-quality studies are required before firm conclusions can be drawn. Promising (although very preliminary) results have also been generated for some herbal formulations. Overall, more research in the field, adhering to the CONSORT statement extension for reporting trials, is justified before the use of herbal products in ED can be recommended.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 92 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 10 11%
Researcher 9 10%
Other 7 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 8%
Student > Master 7 8%
Other 22 24%
Unknown 30 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 17%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 12 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Other 18 20%
Unknown 33 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 130. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 March 2024.
All research outputs
#321,116
of 25,461,852 outputs
Outputs from Drugs
#26
of 3,472 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,306
of 343,566 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drugs
#2
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,461,852 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,472 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 343,566 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.