Table 3.

Sexual function difference among groups (exercise and rehabilitation)

	Pre-test				Post-test
Study, year (Ref)	Experimental*	Control*	Weight (%)	Mean difference	Experimental*	Control*	Weight (%)	Mean difference
	Ahadi, 2013 (26)	10 (64.16 $\pm$ 34.49)	10 (81.67 $\pm$ 19.16)	5.0	-17.51 [-41.96, 6.94]	10 (73.33 $\pm$ 33.52)	10 (85.01 $\pm$ 17.9)	6.4	-11.68 [-35.23, 11.87]
Ahadi, 2013 (26)	11 (67.42 $\pm$ 34.45)	10 (81.67 $\pm$ 19.16)	5.4	-14.25 [-37.82, 9.32]	11 (75.75 $\pm$ 32.8)	10 (85.01 $\pm$ 17.9)	7.1	-9.26 [-31.59, 13.07]
Ahmadi, 2010 (27)	11 (67.42 $\pm$ 34.45)	11 (81.67 $\pm$ 19.16)	5.5	-14.25 [-37.55, 9.05]	11 (75.75 $\pm$ 32.8)	10 (85.01 $\pm$ 17.9)	7.1	-9.26 [-31.59, 13.07]
Azimzadeh, 2013 (29)	43 (95 $\pm$ 38.75)	24 (55.89 $\pm$ 39.52)	Not estimable		16 (100 $\pm$ 39.93)	18 (46.42 $\pm$ 46.9)	0.0	53.58 [24.39, 82.77]
Kargarfard, 2012 (30)	16 (44 $\pm$ 21.4)	16 (40.5 $\pm$ 16.3)	17.3	3.50 [-9.68, 16.68]	11 (47.6 $\pm$ 20.3)	10 (41.7 $\pm$ 11.8)	18.0	5.90 [-8.15, 19.95]
Najafi Dolatabad, 2012 (36)	30 (36.25 $\pm$ 38.4)	30 (27.5 $\pm$ 32.5)	9.3	8.75 [-9.25, 26.75]	30 (30 $\pm$ 32.37)	30 (27.5 $\pm$ 32.5)	13.2	2.50 [-13.91, 18.91]
Romberg, 2005 (33)	65 (67.2 $\pm$ 27.5)	58 (69.8 $\pm$ 18.7)	40.0	-2.60 [-11.26, 6.06]	47 (68.5 $\pm$ 29.7)	48 (75.9 $\pm$ 26.3)	27.9	-7.40 [-18.69, 3.89]
Sutherland, 2001 (35)	11 (61.87 $\pm$ 24.37)	11 (79.37 $\pm$ 16.87)	9.8	-17.50 [-35.02, 0.02]	11 (68.12 $\pm$ 23.75)	11 (66.87 $\pm$ 25)	8.6	1.25 [-19.13, 21.63]
Sutherland, 2005 (34)	11 (68.75 $\pm$ 22.5)	11 (54.37 $\pm$ 24.37)	7.8	14.38 [-5.22, 33.98]	11 (66.25 $\pm$ 21.25)	11 (48.12 $\pm$ 20.62)	11.6	18.13 [0.63, 35.63]
Total (95% CI)	156 (-)	157 (-)	100.0	-2.65 [-8.12, 33.98]	142 (-)	140 (-)	100.0	-0.53 [-6.49, 5.44]
Heterogeneity	Chi2: 11.34, df: 7, (p: 0.12), I2: 38%				Chi2: 8.79, df: 7, (p: 0.27), I2: 20%
Test for overall effect	Z: 0.95, (p: 0.34)				Z: 0.17, (p: 0.86)
*Data presented as number (Mean $\pm$ SD)