Factors associated with current and severe physical side-effects after prostate cancer treatment: What men report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We identified patient and disease characteristics associated with (1) "current" physical side-effects of any severity; and (2) "severe" physical side-effects "ever" experienced by 3,348 (54%) prostate cancer (PCa) survivors in Ireland diagnosed 2-18 years previously. Postal questionnaires collected symptoms at diagnosis, post-biopsy complications, comorbidities, primary treatments and physical side-effects post-treatment (urinary incontinence, erectile dysfunction, libido loss, bowel problems, breast changes, hot flushes, and fatigue, "ever" and "current" at time of questionnaire completion). Men were grouped by "early" (localised) and "late" (locally advanced/advanced) disease at diagnosis. Multivariable logistic regression analysis identified patient and disease-related factors associated with post-treatment side-effects. Complications post-biopsy were associated with higher risk of "current" libido loss and impotence. Radical prostatectomy was associated with higher risk of "current" and "severe" incontinence, libido loss and impotence in both early and late disease. In early disease, brachytherapy was associated with lower risk of "current" fatigue and "severe" impotence. Comorbidities were associated with higher risk of "current" experience of four side-effects (incontinence, libido loss, bowel problems, fatigue). Men on active surveillance/watchful-waiting reported lower risk of sexual dysfunction. These findings could inform development of tailored information on side-effects, which, in turn, could inform treatment decision-making and post-treatment monitoring.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".