Men with body dysmorphic disorder (BDD) may be preoccupied with the size or shape of the penis, which may be causing significant shame or impairment. Little is known about the characteristics and phenomenology of such men and whether they can be differentiated from men with small penis anxiety (SPA) (who do not have BDD), and men with no penile concerns. Twenty-six men with BDD, 31 men with SPA, and 33 men without penile concerns were compared on psychopathology, experiences of recurrent imagery, avoidance and safety-seeking behaviours. Men with BDD had significantly higher scores than both the SPA group and no penile concern group for measures of imagery, avoidance, safety seeking and general psychopathology. The groups differed on the phenomenology of BDD specific to penile size preoccupation clearly from the worries of SPA, which in turn were different to those of the men without concerns. The common avoidance and safety seeking behaviours were identified in such men that may be used clinically.

Background Theory-guided approaches to implementation science have informed translation efforts and the acceptance of eHealth (digital health) interventions in clinical care. However, there is scarce evidence on which theories are best suited to addressing the inherent complexity of eHealth implementation. Objective The objectives of this systematic review are to identify theories that inform and explain eHealth implementation and to classify these theories using the typology by Sovacool and Hess for theories of sociotechnical change. Methods An electronic search was conducted in the PsycINFO, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, Sociological Source Ultimate, Web of Science, ABI/INFORM, EBSCO, and ProQuest databases in June 2019. Studies were included if they were published between 2009 and June 2019; were written in English; reported on empirical research, regardless of study or publication type; reported on one or more theories in the context of eHealth implementation; and were published in a peer-reviewed journal. A total of 2 reviewers independently assessed the titles, abstracts, and full texts. Theories identified were classified using a typology for theories of sociotechnical change, which was considered a useful tool for ordering and analyzing the diverse theoretical approaches as a basis for future theory building. Results Of the 13,101 potentially relevant titles, 119 studies were included. The review identified 36 theories used to explain implementation approaches in eHealth. The most commonly used approaches were the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) (n=33) and the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) (n=32). These theories were primarily concerned with individual and interpersonal elements of eHealth acceptance. Less common were theories that reflect the various disorderly social processes and structural dimensions of implementation, such as the normalization process theory (n=17) and the structuration theory (n=6). Conclusions Theories currently informing the implementation of eHealth interventions predominantly focus on predicting or explaining end-user acceptance. Theoretical perspectives that capture the dense and intricate relationships and structures required to enact sustainable change are less well represented in the eHealth literature. Given the growing acknowledgment of the inherent complexity of eHealth implementation, future research should develop and test models that recognize and reflect the multidimensional, dynamic, and relational nature of this process.

No abstract

We explored self-discrepancy in men with body dysmorphic disorder (BDD) concerned about penis size, men without BDD but anxious about penis size, and controls. Men with BDD (n=26) were compared to those with small penis anxiety (SPA; n=31) and controls (n=33), objectively (by measuring) and investigating self-discrepancy: actual size, ideal size, and size they felt they should be according to self and other. Most men under-estimated their penis size, with the BDD group showing the greatest discrepancy between perceived and ideal size. The SPA group showed a larger discrepancy than controls. This was replicated for the perceptions of others, suggesting the BDD group internalised the belief that they should have a larger penis size. There was a significant correlation between symptoms of BDD and this discrepancy. This self-actual and self-ideal/self-should discrepancy and the role of comparing could be targeted in therapy.

Penile dysmorphic disorder (PDD) is shorthand for men diagnosed with body dysmorphic disorder, in whom the size or shape of the penis is their main, if not their exclusive, preoccupation causing significant shame or handicap. There are no specific measures for identifying men with PDD compared to men who are anxious about the size of their penis but do not have PDD. Such a measure might be helpful for treatment planning, reducing unrealistic expectations, and measuring outcome after any psychological or physical intervention. Our aim was, therefore, to validate a specific measure, termed the Cosmetic Procedure Screening Scale for PDD (COPS-P). Eighty-one male participants were divided into three groups: a PDD group (n = 21), a small penis anxiety group (n = 37), and a control group (n = 23). All participants completed the COPS-P as well as standardized measures of depression, anxiety, social phobia, body image, quality of life, and erectile function. Penis size was also measured. The final COPS-P was based on nine items. The scale had good internal reliability and significant convergent validity with measures of related constructs. It discriminated between the PDD group, the small penis anxiety group, and the control group. This is the first study to develop a scale able to discriminate between those with PDD and men anxious about their size who did not have PDD. Clinicians and researchers may use the scale as part of an assessment for men presenting with anxiety about penis size and as an audit or outcome measure after any intervention for this population.