Changes in Sexual Roles and Quality of Life for Gay Men after Prostate Cancer: Challenges for Sexual Health Providers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Gay men with prostate cancer (GMPCa) may have differential health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and sexual health outcomes than heterosexual men with prostate cancer (PCa), but existing information is based on clinical experience and small studies. AIMS: Our goals were to: (i) describe HRQOL and examine changes in sexual functioning and bother; (ii) explore the psychosocial aspects of sexual health after PCa; and (iii) examine whether there were significant differences on HRQOL and sexual behavior between GMPCa and published norms. METHODS: A convenience sample of GMPCa completed validated disease-specific and general measures of HRQOL, ejaculatory function and bother, fear of cancer recurrence, and satisfaction with prostate cancer care. Measures of self-efficacy for PCa management, illness intrusiveness, and disclosure of sexual orientation were also completed. Where possible, scores were compared against published norms. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Main outcome measures were self-reported sexual functioning and bother on the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index. RESULTS: Compared with norms, GMPCa reported significantly worse functioning and more severe bother scores on urinary, bowel, hormonal symptom scales (Ps < 0.015-0.0001), worse mental health functioning (P < 0.0001), greater fear of cancer recurrence (P < 0.0001), and were more dissatisfied with their PCa medical care. However, GMPCa reported better sexual functioning scores (P < 0.002) compared with norms. Many of the observed differences met criteria for clinical significance. Physical functioning HRQOL and sexual bother scores were similar to that of published samples. GMPCa tended to be more "out" about their sexual orientation than other samples of gay men. CONCLUSIONS: GMPCa reported substantial changes in sexual functioning after PCa treatment. They also reported significantly worse disease-specific and general HRQOL, fear of recurrence, and were less satisfied with their medical care than other published PCa samples. Sexual health providers must have an awareness of the unique functional and HRQOL differences between gay and heterosexual men with PCa.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".