Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Comparison 1 nefazodone vs sertraline, Outcome 1 re‐emergence antidepressant induced sexual dysfunction (physician rated).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 nefazodone vs sertraline, Outcome 1 re‐emergence antidepressant induced sexual dysfunction (physician rated).

Comparison 1 nefazodone vs sertraline, Outcome 2 overall degree of sexual satisfaction (patient rated).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 nefazodone vs sertraline, Outcome 2 overall degree of sexual satisfaction (patient rated).

Comparison 1 nefazodone vs sertraline, Outcome 3 dropouts.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1 nefazodone vs sertraline, Outcome 3 dropouts.

Comparison 1 nefazodone vs sertraline, Outcome 4 Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression score.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.4

Comparison 1 nefazodone vs sertraline, Outcome 4 Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression score.

Comparison 2 sildenafil vs placebo, Outcome 1 endpoint International Index of Erectile Function scores.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.1

Comparison 2 sildenafil vs placebo, Outcome 1 endpoint International Index of Erectile Function scores.

Comparison 2 sildenafil vs placebo, Outcome 2 endpoint Arizona Sexual Experience Scale scores.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.2

Comparison 2 sildenafil vs placebo, Outcome 2 endpoint Arizona Sexual Experience Scale scores.

Comparison 2 sildenafil vs placebo, Outcome 3 endpoint MGH‐Sexual Functioning Questionnaire scores.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.3

Comparison 2 sildenafil vs placebo, Outcome 3 endpoint MGH‐Sexual Functioning Questionnaire scores.

Comparison 2 sildenafil vs placebo, Outcome 4 endpoint Erectile Dysfunction Inventory of Treatment Satisfaction scores.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.4

Comparison 2 sildenafil vs placebo, Outcome 4 endpoint Erectile Dysfunction Inventory of Treatment Satisfaction scores.

Comparison 2 sildenafil vs placebo, Outcome 5 Clinical Global Impression ‐Sexual Function not "much/very much improved" by 6 weeks.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.5

Comparison 2 sildenafil vs placebo, Outcome 5 Clinical Global Impression ‐Sexual Function not "much/very much improved" by 6 weeks.

Comparison 2 sildenafil vs placebo, Outcome 6 Sexual dysfunction defined by Arizona Sexual Experience Scale at trial endpoint.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.6

Comparison 2 sildenafil vs placebo, Outcome 6 Sexual dysfunction defined by Arizona Sexual Experience Scale at trial endpoint.

Comparison 2 sildenafil vs placebo, Outcome 7 dropouts.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.7

Comparison 2 sildenafil vs placebo, Outcome 7 dropouts.

Comparison 2 sildenafil vs placebo, Outcome 8 endpoint Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression score.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.8

Comparison 2 sildenafil vs placebo, Outcome 8 endpoint Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression score.

Comparison 3 bupropion vs placebo, Outcome 1 less than 50% improvement in Arizona Sexual Experiences Scale at 3 weeks.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.1

Comparison 3 bupropion vs placebo, Outcome 1 less than 50% improvement in Arizona Sexual Experiences Scale at 3 weeks.

Comparison 3 bupropion vs placebo, Outcome 2 less than 25% improvement in Arizona Sexual Experiences Scale at 3 weeks.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.2

Comparison 3 bupropion vs placebo, Outcome 2 less than 25% improvement in Arizona Sexual Experiences Scale at 3 weeks.

Comparison 3 bupropion vs placebo, Outcome 3 mean Changes in Sexual Functioning Questionnaire desire/frequency score.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.3

Comparison 3 bupropion vs placebo, Outcome 3 mean Changes in Sexual Functioning Questionnaire desire/frequency score.

Comparison 3 bupropion vs placebo, Outcome 4 dropouts.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.4

Comparison 3 bupropion vs placebo, Outcome 4 dropouts.

Comparison 3 bupropion vs placebo, Outcome 5 mean Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression score.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.5

Comparison 3 bupropion vs placebo, Outcome 5 mean Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression score.

Comparison 4 buspirone vs placebo, Outcome 1 no remission of sexual dysfunction symptoms at four weeks.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.1

Comparison 4 buspirone vs placebo, Outcome 1 no remission of sexual dysfunction symptoms at four weeks.

Comparison 4 buspirone vs placebo, Outcome 2 change in patient‐rated 'overall function' (sexual) visual analogue scale.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.2

Comparison 4 buspirone vs placebo, Outcome 2 change in patient‐rated 'overall function' (sexual) visual analogue scale.

Comparison 4 buspirone vs placebo, Outcome 3 dropouts.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.3

Comparison 4 buspirone vs placebo, Outcome 3 dropouts.

Comparison 5 granisetron vs placebo, Outcome 1 change from baseline on Sexual Side Effects Scale score.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.1

Comparison 5 granisetron vs placebo, Outcome 1 change from baseline on Sexual Side Effects Scale score.

Comparison 5 granisetron vs placebo, Outcome 2 Feiger Sexual Function and Satisfaction Questionnaire score.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.2

Comparison 5 granisetron vs placebo, Outcome 2 Feiger Sexual Function and Satisfaction Questionnaire score.

Comparison 5 granisetron vs placebo, Outcome 3 Arizona Sexual Experience Scale score.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.3

Comparison 5 granisetron vs placebo, Outcome 3 Arizona Sexual Experience Scale score.

Comparison 5 granisetron vs placebo, Outcome 4 dropouts.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.4

Comparison 5 granisetron vs placebo, Outcome 4 dropouts.

Comparison 6 tadalafil vs placebo, Outcome 1 change in International Index of Erectile Function scores.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 6.1

Comparison 6 tadalafil vs placebo, Outcome 1 change in International Index of Erectile Function scores.

Comparison 6 tadalafil vs placebo, Outcome 2 failure to report improvement in erections at trial endpoint.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 6.2

Comparison 6 tadalafil vs placebo, Outcome 2 failure to report improvement in erections at trial endpoint.

Comparison 7 olanzapine vs placebo, Outcome 1 change in 'overall satisfaction' (patient rated assessment of sexual function).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 7.1

Comparison 7 olanzapine vs placebo, Outcome 1 change in 'overall satisfaction' (patient rated assessment of sexual function).

Comparison 7 olanzapine vs placebo, Outcome 2 change in 'overall sexual function' (diary ratings).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 7.2

Comparison 7 olanzapine vs placebo, Outcome 2 change in 'overall sexual function' (diary ratings).

Comparison 7 olanzapine vs placebo, Outcome 3 dropouts due to adverse effects.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 7.3

Comparison 7 olanzapine vs placebo, Outcome 3 dropouts due to adverse effects.

Comparison 8 mirtazapine vs placebo, Outcome 1 change in 'overall satisfaction' (patient rated assessment of sexual function).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 8.1

Comparison 8 mirtazapine vs placebo, Outcome 1 change in 'overall satisfaction' (patient rated assessment of sexual function).

Comparison 8 mirtazapine vs placebo, Outcome 2 change in 'overall sexual function' (diary ratings).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 8.2

Comparison 8 mirtazapine vs placebo, Outcome 2 change in 'overall sexual function' (diary ratings).

Comparison 8 mirtazapine vs placebo, Outcome 3 dropouts due to adverse effects.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 8.3

Comparison 8 mirtazapine vs placebo, Outcome 3 dropouts due to adverse effects.

Comparison 9 yohimbine vs placebo, Outcome 1 change in 'overall satisfaction' (patient rated assessment of sexual function).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 9.1

Comparison 9 yohimbine vs placebo, Outcome 1 change in 'overall satisfaction' (patient rated assessment of sexual function).

Comparison 9 yohimbine vs placebo, Outcome 2 change in 'overall sexual function' (diary ratings).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 9.2

Comparison 9 yohimbine vs placebo, Outcome 2 change in 'overall sexual function' (diary ratings).

Comparison 9 yohimbine vs placebo, Outcome 3 dropouts due to adverse effects.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 9.3

Comparison 9 yohimbine vs placebo, Outcome 3 dropouts due to adverse effects.

Comparison 10 amantadine vs placebo, Outcome 1 change in patient‐rated 'overall function' (sexual) visual analogue scale.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 10.1

Comparison 10 amantadine vs placebo, Outcome 1 change in patient‐rated 'overall function' (sexual) visual analogue scale.

Comparison 10 amantadine vs placebo, Outcome 2 dropouts.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 10.2

Comparison 10 amantadine vs placebo, Outcome 2 dropouts.

Comparison 11 Ginkgo biloba vs placebo, Outcome 1 sexual function ratings at week 8 (questionnaire).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.1

Comparison 11 Ginkgo biloba vs placebo, Outcome 1 sexual function ratings at week 8 (questionnaire).

Comparison 11 Ginkgo biloba vs placebo, Outcome 2 dropouts.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.2

Comparison 11 Ginkgo biloba vs placebo, Outcome 2 dropouts.

Comparison 12 ephedrine vs placebo, Outcome 1 Brief Index of Sexual Functioning for Women at end of treatment phase.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 12.1

Comparison 12 ephedrine vs placebo, Outcome 1 Brief Index of Sexual Functioning for Women at end of treatment phase.

Comparison 13 amantadine vs buspirone, Outcome 1 change in patient‐rated 'overall function' (sexual) visual analogue scale.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 13.1

Comparison 13 amantadine vs buspirone, Outcome 1 change in patient‐rated 'overall function' (sexual) visual analogue scale.

Comparison 13 amantadine vs buspirone, Outcome 2 dropouts.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 13.2

Comparison 13 amantadine vs buspirone, Outcome 2 dropouts.

Comparison 14 olanzapine vs mirtazapine, Outcome 1 change in 'overall satisfaction' (patient rated assessment of sexual function).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 14.1

Comparison 14 olanzapine vs mirtazapine, Outcome 1 change in 'overall satisfaction' (patient rated assessment of sexual function).

Comparison 14 olanzapine vs mirtazapine, Outcome 2 change in 'overall sexual function' (diary ratings).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 14.2

Comparison 14 olanzapine vs mirtazapine, Outcome 2 change in 'overall sexual function' (diary ratings).

Comparison 14 olanzapine vs mirtazapine, Outcome 3 dropouts due to adverse effects.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 14.3

Comparison 14 olanzapine vs mirtazapine, Outcome 3 dropouts due to adverse effects.

Comparison 15 olanzapine vs yohimbine, Outcome 1 change in 'overall satisfaction' (patient rated assessment of sexual function).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 15.1

Comparison 15 olanzapine vs yohimbine, Outcome 1 change in 'overall satisfaction' (patient rated assessment of sexual function).

Comparison 15 olanzapine vs yohimbine, Outcome 2 change in 'overall sexual function' (diary ratings).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 15.2

Comparison 15 olanzapine vs yohimbine, Outcome 2 change in 'overall sexual function' (diary ratings).

Comparison 15 olanzapine vs yohimbine, Outcome 3 dropouts due to adverse effects.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 15.3

Comparison 15 olanzapine vs yohimbine, Outcome 3 dropouts due to adverse effects.

Comparison 16 mirtazapine vs yohimbine, Outcome 1 change in 'overall satisfaction' (patient rated assessment of sexual function).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 16.1

Comparison 16 mirtazapine vs yohimbine, Outcome 1 change in 'overall satisfaction' (patient rated assessment of sexual function).

Comparison 16 mirtazapine vs yohimbine, Outcome 2 change in 'overall sexual function' (diary ratings).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 16.2

Comparison 16 mirtazapine vs yohimbine, Outcome 2 change in 'overall sexual function' (diary ratings).

Comparison 16 mirtazapine vs yohimbine, Outcome 3 dropouts due to adverse effects.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 16.3

Comparison 16 mirtazapine vs yohimbine, Outcome 3 dropouts due to adverse effects.

Comparison 1. nefazodone vs sertraline

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 re‐emergence antidepressant induced sexual dysfunction (physician rated) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

1.1 week one

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.2 endpoint

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2 overall degree of sexual satisfaction (patient rated) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2.1 baseline

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2.2 week 8

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2.3 last rating recorded

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3 dropouts Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3.1 overall

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.2 due to adverse effects

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4 Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression score Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

4.1 baseline

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.2 week 8

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 1. nefazodone vs sertraline
Comparison 2. sildenafil vs placebo

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 endpoint International Index of Erectile Function scores Show forest plot

3

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

1.1 total score

2

112

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

19.36 [15.00, 23.72]

1.2 erectile function

1

89

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

10.0 [7.39, 12.61]

1.3 orgasmic function

1

89

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.5 [1.36, 3.64]

1.4 sexual desire

1

89

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.5 [‐0.38, 1.38]

1.5 intercourse satisfaction

1

89

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

3.50 [2.48, 4.52]

1.6 overall satisfaction

1

89

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.80 [0.86, 2.74]

1.7 ability to acheive erection

2

182

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.15 [0.71, 1.60]

1.8 ability to maintain erection

2

182

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.27 [0.81, 1.73]

1.9 ejaculation frequency

1

92

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.78 [0.01, 1.55]

1.10 orgasm frequency

1

92

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.81 [0.04, 1.58]

1.11 desire frequency

1

93

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.10 [‐0.46, 0.66]

2 endpoint Arizona Sexual Experience Scale scores Show forest plot

2

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

2.1 Total score

2

112

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐4.62 [‐6.29, ‐2.95]

2.2 Sexual desire

1

89

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.60 [‐1.08, ‐0.12]

2.3 Arousal

1

89

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.60 [‐1.06, ‐0.14]

2.4 Erectile function

1

89

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐1.20 [‐1.66, ‐0.74]

2.5 Orgasm (ability)

1

89

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐1.40 [‐1.90, ‐0.90]

2.6 Orgasm (satisfaction)

1

89

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐1.0 [‐1.58, ‐0.42]

3 endpoint MGH‐Sexual Functioning Questionnaire scores Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3.1 Total score

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.2 Sexual desire

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.3 Arousal

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.4 Erectile function

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.5 Orgasm (ability)

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.6 Overall satisfaction

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4 endpoint Erectile Dysfunction Inventory of Treatment Satisfaction scores Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

5 Clinical Global Impression ‐Sexual Function not "much/very much improved" by 6 weeks Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

6 Sexual dysfunction defined by Arizona Sexual Experience Scale at trial endpoint Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

7 dropouts Show forest plot

2

113

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.72 [0.28, 1.86]

8 endpoint Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression score Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 2. sildenafil vs placebo
Comparison 3. bupropion vs placebo

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 less than 50% improvement in Arizona Sexual Experiences Scale at 3 weeks Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2 less than 25% improvement in Arizona Sexual Experiences Scale at 3 weeks Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3 mean Changes in Sexual Functioning Questionnaire desire/frequency score Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3.1 baseline

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.2 week 4

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4 dropouts Show forest plot

2

86

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.10 [0.78, 5.72]

5 mean Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression score Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

5.1 baseline

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

5.2 week 4

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 3. bupropion vs placebo
Comparison 4. buspirone vs placebo

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 no remission of sexual dysfunction symptoms at four weeks Show forest plot

1

46

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.60 [0.35, 1.01]

1.1 male

1

20

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.65 [0.25, 1.74]

1.2 female

1

26

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.57 [0.31, 1.05]

2 change in patient‐rated 'overall function' (sexual) visual analogue scale Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3 dropouts Show forest plot

2

89

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.09 [0.32, 13.59]

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 4. buspirone vs placebo
Comparison 5. granisetron vs placebo

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 change from baseline on Sexual Side Effects Scale score Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2 Feiger Sexual Function and Satisfaction Questionnaire score Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2.1 baseline

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2.2 week 2

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3 Arizona Sexual Experience Scale score Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3.1 baseline

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.2 week 2

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4 dropouts Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 5. granisetron vs placebo
Comparison 6. tadalafil vs placebo

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 change in International Index of Erectile Function scores Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

1.1 erectile function

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2 failure to report improvement in erections at trial endpoint Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 6. tadalafil vs placebo
Comparison 7. olanzapine vs placebo

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 change in 'overall satisfaction' (patient rated assessment of sexual function) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2 change in 'overall sexual function' (diary ratings) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3 dropouts due to adverse effects Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 7. olanzapine vs placebo
Comparison 8. mirtazapine vs placebo

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 change in 'overall satisfaction' (patient rated assessment of sexual function) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2 change in 'overall sexual function' (diary ratings) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3 dropouts due to adverse effects Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 8. mirtazapine vs placebo
Comparison 9. yohimbine vs placebo

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 change in 'overall satisfaction' (patient rated assessment of sexual function) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2 change in 'overall sexual function' (diary ratings) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3 dropouts due to adverse effects Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 9. yohimbine vs placebo
Comparison 10. amantadine vs placebo

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 change in patient‐rated 'overall function' (sexual) visual analogue scale Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2 dropouts Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 10. amantadine vs placebo
Comparison 11. Ginkgo biloba vs placebo

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 sexual function ratings at week 8 (questionnaire) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

1.1 sexual desire

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.2 overall sexual function

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.3 erection maintenance time

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.4 orgasm frequency

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.5 satisfaction to orgasm

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2 dropouts Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 11. Ginkgo biloba vs placebo
Comparison 12. ephedrine vs placebo

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Brief Index of Sexual Functioning for Women at end of treatment phase Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

1.1 sexual desire

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.2 sexual arousability

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.3 lack of vaginal lubrication

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.4 orgasm ability

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.5 orgasm intensity/pleasure

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.6 sexual dissatisfaction

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 12. ephedrine vs placebo
Comparison 13. amantadine vs buspirone

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 change in patient‐rated 'overall function' (sexual) visual analogue scale Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2 dropouts Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 13. amantadine vs buspirone
Comparison 14. olanzapine vs mirtazapine

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 change in 'overall satisfaction' (patient rated assessment of sexual function) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2 change in 'overall sexual function' (diary ratings) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3 dropouts due to adverse effects Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 14. olanzapine vs mirtazapine
Comparison 15. olanzapine vs yohimbine

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 change in 'overall satisfaction' (patient rated assessment of sexual function) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2 change in 'overall sexual function' (diary ratings) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3 dropouts due to adverse effects Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 15. olanzapine vs yohimbine
Comparison 16. mirtazapine vs yohimbine

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 change in 'overall satisfaction' (patient rated assessment of sexual function) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2 change in 'overall sexual function' (diary ratings) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3 dropouts due to adverse effects Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 16. mirtazapine vs yohimbine