Association of Male Circumcision with Women’s Knowledge of its Biomedical Effects and With Their Sexual Satisfaction and Function: A Systematic Review

Grund, Jonathan M; Bryant, Tyler S; Toledo, Carlos; Jackson, Inimfon; Curran, Kelly; Zhou, Sheng; Campo, Jorge Martin del; Yang, Ling; Kivumbi, Apollo; Li, Peizi; Bock, Naomi; Taliano, Joanna; Davis, Stephanie M.

doi:10.1007/s10461-018-2313-0

Cited by 14 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The findings complement those from recent systematic reviews of studies examining women's experiences of men of either MC status. 115 , 116 Each of those reviews found an overall preference by women for the circumcised penis because of esthetics, ease of vaginal penetration, less frequent dyspareunia, better hygiene, and reduced risk of infection.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Contrasting Evidence Concerning the Effect of Male Circumcision on Sexual Function, Sensation, and Pleasure: A Systematic Review

Morris

Krieger

2020

Sexual Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Active debate concerns whether male circumcision (MC) affects sexual function, penile sensation, or sexual pleasure. Aim: To perform a systematic review examining the effect of MC on these parameters. Methods: PRISMA-compliant searches of PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar were performed, with "circumcision" used together with appropriate search terms. Articles meeting the inclusion criteria were rated for quality by the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network system. Main Outcome Measure: Evidence rated by quality. Results: Searches identified 46 publications containing original data, as well as 4 systematic reviews (2 with meta-analyses), plus 29 critiques of various studies and 15 author replies, which together comprised a total of 94 publications. There was overall consistency in conclusions arising from high-and moderate-quality survey data in randomized clinical trials, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, physiological studies, large longitudinal studies, and cohort studies in diverse populations. Those studies found MC has no or minimal adverse effect on sexual function, sensation, or pleasure, with some finding improvements. A consensus from physiological and histological studies was that the glans and underside of the shaft, not the foreskin, are involved in neurological pathways mediating erogenous sensation. In contrast to the higher quality evidence, data supporting adverse effects of MC on function, sensation, or pleasure were found to be of low quality, as explained in critiques of those studies. Conclusion: The consensus of the highest quality literature is that MC has minimal or no adverse effect, and in some studies, it has benefits on sexual functions, sensation, satisfaction, and pleasure for males circumcised neonatally or in adulthood.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Contrasting Evidence Concerning the Effect of Male Circumcision on Sexual Function, Sensation, and Pleasure: A Systematic Review

Morris

Krieger

2020

Sexual Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The reasons given by women for favoring MC were also esthetics, vaginal penetration, hygiene, and reduced infection risk . A systematic review of all 29 relevant publications found the same, as did a smaller systematic review …”

Section: Physical Harmmentioning

confidence: 71%

“…149 A systematic review of all 29 relevant publications found the same, 150 as did a smaller systematic review. 151 A list of "16 functions of the foreskin" 152 (Table 3) compiled by opponents, and widely circulated on the Internet will now be evaluated in relation to data, when available, there being no evidence to assess the veracity of some of the claims.…”

Section: Sexual Pleasurementioning

confidence: 99%

Critical evaluation of arguments opposing male circumcision: A systematic review

Morris

Moreton²,

Krieger

2019

J Evidence Based Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To systematically evaluate evidence against male circumcision (MC). Methods We searched PubMed, Google Scholar, EMBASE and Cochrane databases. Results Database searches retrieved 297 publications for inclusion. Bibliographies of these yielded 101 more. After evaluation we found: Claims that MC carries high risk were contradicted by low frequency of adverse events that were virtually all minor and easily treated with complete resolution. Claims that MC causes psychological harm were contradicted by studies finding no such harm. Claims that MC impairs sexual function and pleasure were contradicted by high‐quality studies finding no adverse effect. Claims disputing the medical benefits of MC were contradicted by a large body of high‐quality evidence indicating protection against a wide range of infections, dermatological conditions, and genital cancers in males and the female sexual partners of men. Risk‐benefit analyses reported that benefits exceed risks by 100‐200 to 1. To maximize benefits and minimize risks, the evidence supported early infant MC rather than arguments that the procedure should be delayed until males are old enough to decide for themselves. Claims that MC of minors is unethical were contradicted by balanced evaluations of ethical issues supporting the rights of children to be provided with low‐risk, high‐benefit interventions such as MC for better health. Expert evaluations of case‐law supported the legality of MC of minors. Other data demonstrated that early infant MC is cost‐saving to health systems. Conclusions Arguments opposing MC are supported mostly by low‐quality evidence and opinion, and are contradicted by strong scientific evidence.

show abstract

“…Grund et al [104], Morris et al [105] No difference in perception of sexual sensation between circumcised and uncircumcised men…”

Section: Supposed Sexual and Physical Harmsmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Willingness by men was particularly high for getting their sons circumcised (e.g., see [94] [102] [103]). Most women in different countries would encourage an uncircumcised partner to get circumcised, and most preferred circumcision for sons (see systematic reviews [104] [105]).…”

Section: Sexual Functionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Critical Evaluation of a Survey Claiming “Long-Term Adverse Outcomes from Neonatal Circumcision”*

Bailis¹,

Moreton²,

Morris³

2019

ASM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We critically evaluate an online "Global survey of circumcision harm" that gauged beliefs of men who thought that their neonatal circumcision had harmed them. Sequential evaluation of the survey data and claims reveal numerous serious flaws that are at odds with strong scientific evidence. Moreover, the one-sided study design and "loaded" survey title meant the findings were not representative of the general population of circumcised males. None of the participants' claimed physical problems were confirmed by a health practitioner. Belief in this seriously flawed survey has potential to cause psychological harm to vulnerable men influenced by anti-circumcision claims, and as such has serious detrimental implications for male sexual health. The survey appears driven less by empiricism and more by psychological forces, as we show in detail. The overwhelming body of high quality medical scientific evidence finds no adverse effect of male circumcision on sexual function and pleasure, but strong evidence for a wide array of lifetime benefits in protection against infections, dermatological problems, and genital cancers. Consistent with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, children are entitled to low risk procedures that are beneficial to their health. In conclusion, the survey and its uncritical presentation do a disservice to evidence-based medicine, sexual health, mental health, public health, human rights, and pediatric policy development. It should therefore be dismissed as unreliable.

show abstract

Association of Male Circumcision with Women’s Knowledge of its Biomedical Effects and With Their Sexual Satisfaction and Function: A Systematic Review

Cited by 14 publications

References 39 publications

The Contrasting Evidence Concerning the Effect of Male Circumcision on Sexual Function, Sensation, and Pleasure: A Systematic Review

The Contrasting Evidence Concerning the Effect of Male Circumcision on Sexual Function, Sensation, and Pleasure: A Systematic Review

Critical evaluation of arguments opposing male circumcision: A systematic review

Critical Evaluation of a Survey Claiming “Long-Term Adverse Outcomes from Neonatal Circumcision”*

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About