MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4214852922 · doi:10.5505/tjo.2022.3541

The Effect of Body Image Concerns, Anxiety, and Depression on Sexual Problems in Gynecological Cancer Patients

2022· article· en· W4214852922 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueTurkish Journal of Oncology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth and Wellbeing Research
Canadian institutionsStantec (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnxietyDepression (economics)MedicineClinical psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gynecological cancers and their treatments directly affect the female genitals. Therefore, gynecological cancers are one of the cancer types where sexual dysfunctions are most common. Sexual problems can be a normal result of treatment processes and of cancer, as well as a reflection of the psychological difficulties experienced by individuals during the disease process. The disease itself and the treatments applied can cause psychiatric problems such as body image concern, depression, anxiety, decreased selfesteem, sleep disorders, and sexual dysfunction affect the quality of life negatively. The psychological treatment methods include psychoeducation, group therapy, sexual counseling, marriage counseling, structured psychotherapy, and brief psychosexual interventions. Psychiatric symptoms should be considered to emerge following treatment and quality of life and sexual functions may be adversely affected in gynecological cancer patients, and a multidisciplinary approach including psychological treatment and symptom management should be provided for the effective treatment of sexual difficulties.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.914

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.456
Teacher spread0.419 · 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