Sexual Activity After Acute Coronary Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Little is known about how best to support both patients and their partners in the reengagement of sexual activity (SA) after acute coronary syndrome (ACS), with sparse direct data from the partner on their needs and concerns in the area of SA support. OBJECTIVES: We undertook a qualitative study to address this gap in the literature through 3 objectives from a patient and partner perspective: (1) to characterize the experience of reengaging in SA post ACS, (2) to identify needs and priorities in the area of SA support post ACS, and (3) to determine whether cardiac rehabilitation (CR) could be an acceptable point of intervention for SA support. METHODS: Semistructured qualitative interviews were conducted with 6 male patients who were post ACS and their partners (age range, 47-81 years). Patients were criterion sampled from the Alberta Provincial Project for Outcome Assessment in Coronary Heart Disease database. Inductive thematic data analysis was conducted. RESULTS: Four themes were identified: "importance," "support received," "on their own," and "wanting support." Couples reaffirmed the importance of SA pre and post ACS, reported SA support as currently insufficient but articulated ways it could be improved, and reported CR as a current source of SA support but thought there could be room for improvement on the content and delivery of such information. CONCLUSIONS: This study illustrates the potential value of promoting SA support for both patients who are post ACS and their partners and reports that SA support provided at CR would be viewed as important, needed, and acceptable.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".