RESEARCH LIBRARY RECORD

Anatomic maps of erogenous sensation and pleasure in the penis: are there differences between circumcised and uncircumcised men?

Circumcision-status background evidence—not a restoration outcome study.

ObservationalCircumcision-status comparison

Source details

Authors
Michael Zaliznyak et al.
Journal or source
The Journal of Sexual Medicine
Year
2023
DOI or authoritative URL
10.1093/jsxmed/qdac032
Study type
Cross-sectional self-report mapping study
Population or material studied
Adult men grouped by circumcision status reporting regional erogenous sensation and pleasure.
Major findings
Compared subjective anatomic maps and reports between circumcision-status groups.
Limitations
Self-report and cross-sectional design; not restoration. Erogenous ratings are not objective sensory thresholds or evidence of causal effects.
Relevance to restoration
Circumcision-status background evidence—not a restoration outcome study.
Source-review status
Abstract reviewed
Last reviewed
2026-08-11

Compared subjective anatomic maps and reports between circumcision-status groups.

Read the limitations

This record is an editorial summary. Follow the DOI or authoritative source, consider the study design and population, and do not generalize beyond what was studied.