MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162347395 · doi:10.1097/ppo.0b013e31819765ef

Sexual Rehabilitation After Localized Prostate Cancer

2009· article· en· W2162347395 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 Cancer Journal · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNational Cancer InstituteU.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
KeywordsPsychological interventionProstate cancerRehabilitationNursing Interventions ClassificationDiseaseMedicinePsychotherapistCancerClinical psychologyPsychologyPhysical therapyNursingPathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many published articles have documented the impact of prostate-cancer treatment on sexual functioning in men treated for localized disease. Surprisingly, the literature on interventions to rehabilitate men's sexual functioning is much more limited. In this article, we review the sexual-rehabilitation interventions for prostate-cancer patients and identify a number of common themes across interventions. We also identify areas where further research is needed and propose a conceptual model based on psychologic and nursing theories and informed by the published research.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.775
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.294 · 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