MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4214754591 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1293944/v1

Patient reported disease-specific concerns relating to sexuality in multiple myeloma

2022· preprint· en· W4214754591 on OpenAlexaff
Megan S. Henkelman, Kirsti Toivonen, Jason Tay, Sara Beattie, Lauren M. Walker

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health ServicesUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman sexualityMultiple myelomaDiseaseMedicinePsychologyInternal medicineSociologyGender studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Purpose There is increasing recognition that cancer and its treatment can have lasting effects on sexuality. However, most studies focus on breast and reproductive cancers while hematological cancers remain understudied. Only one prior study has acknowledged the existence of sexuality concerns among multiple myeloma (MM) survivors but did not expand upon them. This study explored how diagnosis and treatment of MM may affect sexual expression and also examined patient-provider communication about sexuality. Methods Men and women with MM (N=65) were recruited internationally for an online survey. The survey included open-ended questions about MM-specific barriers to engaging in sexual activity, methods used to adapt to sexual changes, and communication with healthcare providers. Answers to open-ended questions were summarized using a qualitative descriptive approach. Results Participants identified several barriers to sexual activity that may be unique to MM, such as concerns about bone health, infections, and vaginal bleeding and bruising. They also described adapting to sexual challenges by trying sexual medicines/aids, changing their sexual expression, and managing treatment risks. Half of the participants reported speaking to providers about sexuality, with a minority receiving sexual health-related recommendations. Conclusions Participants often faced sexual challenges after diagnosis, many of which may be unique to MM. While some were able to adapt to these changes, sexuality concerns were under-discussed and under-treated by healthcare providers. Proposed suggestions for improving patient-provider communication about sexuality and clinical care are offered based on the gaps identified by participants.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.292
GPT teacher head0.447
Teacher spread0.154 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch SquareSame topicSexual function and dysfunction studiesFrench-language works237,207