MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3012315428 · doi:10.1016/j.sxmr.2020.01.004

Sex After Prostate Cancer in Gay and Bisexual Men: A Review of the Literature

2020· review· en· W3012315428 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueSexual Medicine Reviews · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersProstate Cancer Canada
KeywordsHuman sexualityProstate cancerHealth carePsychologyPopulationHomosexualitySexual orientationReproductive healthClinical psychologyMedicineCancerGender studiesSocial psychologySociologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most commonly diagnosed cancer among males globally, and it has one of the highest 5-year net survival rates of all cancers. Most diagnosed individuals, therefore, must live with the consequences of the disease and its treatments, including sexual side effects. Unfortunately, little is known about the sexual outcomes of PCa in individuals who identify as gay or bisexual. OBJECTIVES: To highlight the unique concerns, experiences, and needs of gay and bisexual men with PCa by reviewing the literature on sexual outcomes in this patient population. METHODS: A literature review through June 2019 was conducted, with a focus on sexual outcomes in gay and bisexual men with PCa; comparisons of sexual outcomes between heterosexual and gay and bisexual men with PCa; and the health care experiences of gay and bisexual men with PCa, specifically with regards to discussing sex with health care providers. RESULTS: Gay and bisexual men with PCa report a number of unique sexual concerns compared to their heterosexual counterparts. They face heteronormative biases and homophobia in the health care system and are frequently dissatisfied with the information they receive with regards to PCa and sexuality. CONCLUSION: There has been limited research on the experiences of gay and bisexual men with PCa; additional research to replicate and extend upon the findings of previous studies is warranted. Research on the experiences of PCa patients and survivors should be inclusive of participants of all sexual orientations and gender identities. Research results must be translated into clinical practice, so that health care providers can communicate specific and relevant information to their gay and bisexual patients. McInnis MK, Pukall, CF. Sex After Prostate Cancer in Gay and Bisexual Men: A Review of the Literature. Sex Med Rev 2020;8:466-472.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.573
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.336 · 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