MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2990593662 · doi:10.1080/09515070.2019.1695582

Exploring patient narratives of intimacy and sexuality among men with prostate cancer

2019· article· en· W2990593662 on OpenAlexaff
Nandini Maharaj, Arminée Kazanjian

Bibliographic record

VenueCounselling Psychology Quarterly · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFamily Support in Illness
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersMovember Foundation
KeywordsHuman sexualityNarrativeProstate cancerPsychologyCancerPsychoanalysisPsychotherapistGender studiesSociologyMedicineArtInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The burden of prostate cancer is considerable, with some men needing treatment to slow the growth of tumors, and others requiring surgery to remove the prostate gland. Such medical and surgical treatments for prostate cancer can increase men’s risk for impotence and urinary incontinence, leading to physical and emotional distress. Using a qualitative descriptive design involving semi-structured interviews, we asked men (n = 20) who had been diagnosed with prostate cancer to describe their psychosocial needs and experiences. Within these patient narratives were elements of personal and interpersonal loss, vulnerability, stigma, and self-blame. Based on our thematic analysis, we identified three themes: 1) I’m not 18 anymore, 2) Nothing below the waistline, and 3) It’s a family affair. Our objective in this paper is to highlight the ways in which men’s sexual health and intimate relationships are affected by prostate cancer. Discussed are the clinical implications of the findings for supporting individuals and couples affected by prostate cancer.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.125
Threshold uncertainty score0.511

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations16
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCounselling Psychology QuarterlySame topicFamily Support in IllnessFrench-language works237,207