MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4255891967 · doi:10.1177/030089161410000219

Sexual Satisfaction Assessment in 194 Nonmetastatic Cancer Patients on Treatment or in follow-up

2014· article· en· W4255891967 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueTumori Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDignityHuman sexualityMedicineQuality of life (healthcare)Hospital Anxiety and Depression ScaleAnxietyCancerPsycho-oncologyDepression (economics)Clinical psychologyFamily medicinePsychiatryInternal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aims and Background Sexuality is an important aspect of quality of life, but health care professionals still avoid discussing sexual issues with cancer patients. Methods and Study Design We present a secondary analysis of sexuality issues according to the results of a survey on 266 patients with early-stage cancer. The aim of the survey was to ascertain the feasibility and clinical usefulness of questionnaires (Patient Dignity Inventory, PDI; Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, HADS; Edmonton Symptom Assesssment Scale, ESAS; FACIT-spiritual well-being scale, FACITSP; System of Belief Inventory, SBI-15R) investigating aspects such as dignity, hope and research of meaning in life. The present study is an ancillary analysis of the full sample, and we have focused on the results of FACIT-SP about the correlation between sexual satisfaction and clinical characteristics in 108 patients having solid tumors and 86 having hematological malignancies with no metastases who were on active cancer treatment or in follow-up in four different cancer treatment settings during the first half of 2011. Results The median age of the 194 patients was 65 years, 112 were women, 155 were undergoing treatment and 39 were in follow-up. Eighty-three patients were above the cutoff score for HADS. Among the 171 believers, 80 were churchgoers and 91 were nonchurchgoers, whereas the nonbelievers among the patients were 23. Thirty-five percent of the patients did not respond to the sexuality item of the questionnaire. Among the responders (n = 126), 36% reported having no sexual satisfaction (score = 0). Sexual dissatisfaction was greater in older patients (47% vs 31%, not significant [NS]), women (43% vs 27%, NS), patients on treatment (38% vs 25%, NS), patients who requested psychological support (53% vs 25%, P = 0.001), patients with high levels of anxiety and depression, i.e., HADS scores >10 (44% vs 30%, NS), nonbelievers (61% vs 34% among churchgoers, 29% among believers but nonchurchgoers, P = 0.046). Conclusions One out of 3 patients did not respond to the item on sexuality. Among the responders, 1 out of 3 reported having no sexual satisfaction. Half of the patients receiving psychological support considered their sexual life not satisfying. Clinical interviews and specific questionnaires on sexuality should be used to investigate this particular aspect.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.132
Threshold uncertainty score0.967

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.304 · 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