MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100830321 · doi:10.1111/jsm.13030

Impact of Prostate Cancer Treatment on the Sexual Quality of Life for Men-Who-Have-Sex-with-Men

2015· article· en· W2100830321 on OpenAlexafffund
Tsz Kin Lee, Ariel B. Handy, Winkle Kwan, John L. Oliffe, Lori A. Brotto, Richard J. Wassersug, Gary W. Dowsett

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Sexual Medicine · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsSpinal Cord Injury BCUniversity of British ColumbiaThames Valley Children's CentreBC Cancer Agency
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPsychosocialMen who have sex with menFocus groupQuality of life (healthcare)PsychologyClinical psychologyQualitative researchProstate cancerGynecologyMedicineFamily medicinePsychotherapistCancerInternal medicineHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: With earlier prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis and an increased focus on survivorship, post-treatment sexual quality of life (QoL) has become increasingly important. Research and validated instruments for sexual QoL assessment based on heterosexual samples have limited applicability for men-who-have-sex-with-men (MSM). AIM: We aimed to create a validated instrument for assessing sexual needs and concerns of MSM post-PCa treatment. Here we explore post-PCa treatment sexual concerns for a sample of MSM, as the first part of this multi-phase project. METHODS: Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted with 16 MSM face-to-face or via Internet-based video conferencing. Participants were asked open-ended questions about their experiences of sexual QoL following PCa. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, uploaded to NVivo 8(TM) , and analyzed using qualitative methodology. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: We have conducted semi-structure qualitative interviews on 16 MSM who were treated for PCa. Focus was on post-treatment sexual concerns. RESULTS: The following themes were inductively derived: (i) erectile, urinary, ejaculation, and orgasmic dysfunctions; (ii) challenges to intimate relationships; and (iii) lack of MSM-specific oncological and psychosocial support for PCa survivorship. Sexual practices pre-treatment ranked in order of frequency were masturbation, oral sex, and anal sex, an ordering that prevailed post-treatment. Sexual QoL decreased with erectile, urinary, and ejaculation dysfunctions. Post-treatment orgasms were compromised. Some single men and men in non-monogamous relationships reported a loss of confidence or difficulty meeting other men post-treatment. Limited access to targeted oncological and psychosocial supports posed difficulties in coping with PCa for MSM. CONCLUSIONS: The negative impact on sexual QoL can be severe for MSM and requires targeted attention. Penile-vaginal intercourse and erectile function have been the primary focus of sexual research and rehabilitation for men with PCa, and do not adequately reflect the sexual practices of MSM. Our findings suggest that future research dedicated to MSM with PCa is needed to incorporate their sexual practices and preferences specifically into treatment decisions, and that targeted oncological and psychosocial support services are also warranted.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.374
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.103
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.295 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations64
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Sexual MedicineSame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207