MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2900848106 · doi:10.1002/hep.30359

Sexual Dysfunction and Sex Hormone Abnormalities in Patients With Cirrhosis: Review of Pathogenesis and Management

2018· review· en· W2900848106 on OpenAlexaff
Shuet Fong Neong, Emma O. Billington, Stephen E. Congly

Bibliographic record

VenueHepatology · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSexual dysfunctionCirrhosisMedicineSexual functionPathogenesisErectile dysfunctionTestosterone (patch)Depression (economics)Portal hypertensionInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Healthy sexual function is important to maintain a good quality of life but is frequently impaired in patients with cirrhosis. The degree of sexual dysfunction appears to be linked with the degree of hepatic dysfunction. In men, sexual dysfunction can be related to the hyperestrogenism of portal hypertension and/or to decreased testosterone resulting from testicular dysfunction. In women, suppression of the hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal axis appears to be a principal contributor, with no significant effect of portal hypertension. There is also a huge psychological barrier to break through as there is a component of depression in many patients with cirrhosis. Sexual dysfunction is often underdiagnosed in the cohort with cirrhosis. Management of sexual disorders in patients with cirrhosis can be challenging as they are often multifactorial. A multidisciplinary approach is key in managing these patients. We review the current literature on the pathogenesis of sexual dysfunction in patients with cirrhosis and propose a stepwise algorithm to better manage these patients.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations57
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHepatologySame topicSexual function and dysfunction studiesFrench-language works237,207