The role of masculinities in psychological and emotional help seeking by men with prostate cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of demographic characteristics and masculinities on seeking support for psychosocial care needs in men with prostate cancer. METHODS: Prostate cancer survivors (n = 225) completed mail-out surveys measuring psychological care needs, masculinities, and psychological and emotional help-seeking intention and behaviour at 6- and 12-month follow-ups. RESULTS: (1,225) = 4.72, P = .03, and being born overseas was associated with seeking peer support (1,225) = 7.13, P = .01. Men with higher levels of optimistic action who reported moderate to high unmet psychological need were less likely to seek help for psychological and emotional concerns at 6- (odds ratio [OR] = 0.06, confidence interval [CI], 0.01-0.46) and 12-month (OR = 0.13, CI, 0.26-0.65) follow-ups. CONCLUSIONS: Optimistic action may explain why some men with prostate cancer fail to seek help for their psychological care needs. Clinicians should be aware that men with chronic illness who appear to approach challenges with optimistic action may in fact be less likely to seek psychological help when needed.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".