Sexual Health After Cancer Therapy
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There are more than 14.5 million cancer survivors in the United States in 2016. Although there are no definitive statistics, in one survey of cancer survivors, 46% reported sexual health problems related to the diagnosis and treatment of cancer, and 71% said that they had received no care for sexual dysfunction. The impact of prostate cancer treatments on erectile dysfunction (ED) is well known. However, the review by Voznesensky et al highlights the fact that treatment of men with other malignancies, including bladder, testicular, colorectal, and those treated with marrow or peripheral stemcell transplant, can alsoplayhavoc with erectile function. The authors explain the anatomy and physiology of normal erections and explain how surgery, radiation, chemotherapy, and hormonal therapy can cause ED, dry ejaculation, climacturia (leaking urine during orgasm), or anorgasmia (difficulty reaching orgasm). They provide a thorough discussion of the standard approaches to ED and conclude that patients should be referred to urologists for treatment of cancer-related ED.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 it