MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

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

2009· review· en· W2145279837 on OpenAlexaff
Richard J. Wassersug, John L. Oliffe

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.010
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations60
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Sexual MedicineSame topicMale Breast Health StudiesFrench-language works237,207