Pilot Study of Radical Hysterectomy Versus Radical Trachelectomy on Sexual Distress
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Radical trachelectomy, which leaves the uterus intact, has emerged as a desirable surgical option for eligible women with early-stage cervical cancer who wish to preserve fertility. The available data suggest excellent obstetrical outcomes with radical trachelectomy, and no differences in sexual responding between radical trachelectomy and radical hysterectomy. There is a need to examine the effect of radical hysterectomy on sexual distress given that it is distinct from sexual function. Participants were 34 women diagnosed with early-stage cervical cancer. The authors report 1-month postsurgery data for 29 women (radical hysterectomy group: n = 17, M age = 41.8 years; radical trachelectomy group: n = 12, M age = 31.8 years), and 6-month follow-up data on 26 women. Whereas both groups experienced an increase in sex-related distress immediately after surgery, distress continued to increase 6 months after surgery for the radical hysterectomy group but decreased in the radical trachelectomy group. There were no between-group differences in mood, anxiety, or general measures of health. The decrease in sex-related distress in the radical trachelectomy but not in the radical hysterectomy group suggests that the preservation of fertility may have attenuated sex-related distress. Care providers should counsel women exploring surgical options for cervical cancer about potential sex distress-related sequelae.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".