MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4298396143 · doi:10.5489/cuaj.8093

An environmental scan of sexual health services for cancer survivors among Canadian institutions

2022· article· en· W4298396143 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Ryan Flannigan, Andrew Matthew, Sydney Sparanese, Eugenia Wu, Steven Guirguis, Monita Sundar, Fred Saad, Andrew Loblaw, Jessica Nargi, Luke Witherspoon, Christina Canil, Ricardo Rendon, Laura E. Labelle, Jill Turner, Celestia S. Higano

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Urological Association Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaAlberta Health ServicesQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences CentreUniversity of OttawaDalhousie UniversityUniversity of TorontoOttawa HospitalHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of CalgaryPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversité de MontréalUniversity of British ColumbiaProstate Cancer CanadaCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCancerReproductive healthPsychologyMedicineEnvironmental healthInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An environmental scan of sexual health services for cancer survivors among Canadian institutions NEED FOR SEXUAL HEALTH SERVICES Following treatment, cancer survivors face many lasting side effects that can negatively impact their quality of life.Sexual dysfunction, in particular, is cited as one of the most common and challenging side effects in gynecological and urological malignancies.Among Canadian men, prostate cancer is the most common malignancy.The side effects of treating prostate cancer pose significant obstacles, including sexual dysfunction (i.e., erectile dysfunction, loss of libido), urinary incontinence, complex pain, and fatigue.Erectile dysfunction is reported to be as high as 60-70% in patients treated with nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy and between 20-50% in patients treated with radiation therapy.Upwards of 60% of men report "moderate" to "big" bother with their sexual symptoms two years post-surgery, further underscoring the deleterious and lasting effects on their quality of life.Systemic therapies, such as androgen deprivation therapy, are associated with detrimental effects on sexual function, including five-to six-fold increased risk of reduced libido, impaired penile contractility, and reduced response to phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors.Adjustment after cancer treatment requires individualized, patient-centered approaches to navigate changes in sexual function.There is increasing evidence supporting a biopsychosocial approach to holistically address the medical, psychological, and interpersonal aspects of sexual health (SH).In Canada, there is ongoing work to adapt this framework in establishing cancer survivorship resources and clinics to address the sexual dysfunction among survivors and their partners. DEVELOPMENT OF THE CANADIAN ONCOLOGY SEXUAL HEALTH INITIATIVEDespite the demand, SH needs in the oncology patient population are currently underaddressed and underfunded.Multidisciplinary SH clinics in oncology settings are uniquely positioned to address the complexities of cancer-related SH concerns.The Canadian Oncology Sexual Health Initiative (COSHI) was conceived to facilitate and improve the delivery of SH resources across Canadian cancer care settings.COSHI proposes a national, multidisciplinary coalition of SH experts working towards the following objectives: 1) develop SH virtual resources for cancer centers; 2) develop standardized treatment protocols for SH; 3) develop cancer-type-specific guidelines for SH treatment; 4) leverage a nationwide team approach to research SH in oncology settings, and develop novel treatment strategies and resources.COSHI will begin with a focus on prostate cancer and then expand to include other cancer subtypes across biological sex and gender.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.958
Threshold uncertainty score0.303

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.009
Science and technology studies0.0060.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Urological Association Journal→Same topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues→French-language works237,207→