The health and well-being of prostate cancer patients and male-to-female transsexuals on androgen deprivation therapy: A qualitative study with comments on expectations and estrogen
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Both male-to-female transsexuals and advanced prostate cancer (PCa) patients are treated with androgen-suppressing drugs that have emasculating effects. Additionally, transsexuals take estrogenic compounds to feminize their bodies. We explore the quality of life of these populations, based on interviews with 12 individuals from each group. Overall, the transsexuals had a better psychological response to chemical castration than the PCa patients. The transsexuals showed more enthusiasm about the changes in their life; they viewed their lives as beginning anew, accepted their reduced libido, and were more comfortable with their increased emotionality. Different responses in the two groups are not surprising given that they undergo androgen deprivation under very different medical contexts. However, the fact that the transwomen are able to conceptualize the effects as positive suggests that some androgen-deprived PCa patients may benefit from reconceptualizing their changes within a positive framework. Additionally, difference in the two populations may be attributed, in part, to the fact that the transsexuals take supplemental estrogen. Circumstantial evidence suggests that estrogen in androgen-deprived males may improve sleep quality, help retain sexual interest, and protect cognitive function. This suggests that PCa patients may benefit from using estradiol for androgen suppression.
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 | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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".