Sexual health and self-esteem in adolescents and young adults with cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A diagnosis of cancer compounds the complexities of adolescent development. Self-esteem and sexual health have a significant impact on adolescent identity formation, especially those young patients coping with a diagnosis of cancer. Knowledge of sexual health, interpersonal relationships, and body image concerns are factors that have an impact on the development of self-esteem during these transition periods into adulthood. A clinical perspective on these issues was utilized to highlight the nature of self-esteem and sexuality in adolescents and young adults with cancer. Case examples and clinical recommendations from a workshop on self-esteem and sexuality in adolescents and young adults with cancer are presented. Understanding the adolescent's and young adult's stage of identity formation, their social and developmental histories, and methods for increasing self-esteem can give insight to healthcare professionals in fostering positive self-esteem and sexual health in these young patients. Through the awareness of the specific factors affecting adolescents and young adults with cancer, oncology teams can assist in creating an atmosphere for the growth of positive self-esteem and sexual health in their adolescent patients.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".