Sexual Dysfunction Among Adolescent and Young Adult Men Diagnosed with Cancer
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer patients frequently demonstrate sexual dysfunction; however, there is a lack of data quantifying the severity and frequency. Methods: Males aged 18–39 years, diagnosed with cancer of any kind and who were scheduled to begin, were actively receiving, or had completed cancer treatment within 6 months, were offered validated surveys during their oncology appointment. These surveys included the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-6), Masturbation Erection Index (MEI), 36-Item Short Form Survey, and 5-point Likert scales to assess their desire and ability to engage in sex and masturbation. Results: Forty subjects completed the IIEF survey with a mean score of 17.7 ± 11, erectile dysfunction (ED) prevalence accordingly was 58%. Thirty-eight subjects completed the MEI with a mean score of 25.3 ± 5.3, ED prevalence was again 58%. Age and IIEF scores demonstrated a statistically significant ( p < 0.05, n = 38) Pearson's correlation coefficient of 0.40, patients younger than 30 years had an ED prevalence of 72% (mean IIEF 13), whereas patients aged 30 years and older had an ED prevalence of 45% (mean IIEF 22). All treatment modalities had ED rates >30%: chemotherapy demonstrated the highest prevalence at 64% (mean IIEF 17), whereas radiation therapy had the lowest prevalence at 33% (mean IIEF 23). Conclusion: This study demonstrates that the prevalence of sexual dysfunction among male AYA patients undergoing treatment for cancer is high. AYA oncologists should discuss potential sexual health concerns when treating this population. The exact cause of ED (non-organic vs. organic) within this group should be explored further.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it