MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Social Context for Psychological Distress from Iatrogenic Gynecomastia with Suggestions for its Management

2009· review· en· W2145279837 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Sexual Medicine · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMale Breast Health Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGynecomastiaContext (archaeology)DistressPsychological distressPsychologyPsychotherapistMedicineMental healthInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Gynecomastia (breast development in males) is a side effect of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for prostate cancer (PCa). Medical interventions to prevent or treat gynecomastia carry risk of additional detrimental side effects. However, untreated gynecomastia can be physically uncomfortable and psychologically distressing. Shame from gynecomastia can lead patients to stop otherwise beneficial exercise. AIMS: Our first aim is to explore the social context for gynecomastia and how it is interpreted by men with the condition, as well as by others, both male and female. Subsequently, we use our understanding of why gynecomastia is psychologically distressing to propose psychosocial interventions that could help men accept this side effect of ADT. METHODS: We draw on academic literature, media accounts, and web-based testimonials from men with gynecomastia, to understand how gynecomastia is perceived by both patients and the medical community. We examine these resources in light of gynecomastia's impact on sex roles, sexuality, and gender identity issues. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: By exploring what breasts in a male mean to the individual, we produce an understanding of the social context for distress from gynecomastia. From this understanding, we derive hypotheses about who might be most distressed from gynecomastia and strategies for alleviating this distress. RESULTS: The shame and stigma of gynecomastia is linked to the objectification of women. We suggest that men fear that their breasts will marginalize and subordinate them within gender hierarchies. There is little evidence that breasts on a male erotically attract either men or women. Novel options for living with gynecomastia are contrasted with medicalized strategies including mastectomy. CONCLUSION: Assessment instruments need to be developed to identify patients most likely to experience distress from gynecomastia and seek out medical interventions. Surgical, radiological, or pharmacological interventions may not be universally necessary if greater acceptance of gynecomastia is made available through psychosocial support programs. For example, PCa patients may learn to accept gynecomastia through reconceptualizing their breasts as autoerotic. Support programs modeled on those of the breast cancer community, including Encore and dragon boat racing, may also help to build communities to serve patients with gynecomastia while defending individuals against shame, isolation, and loss of self-esteem.

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.

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)0.002
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.951
Threshold uncertainty score0.667

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.324 · 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