MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4310232728 · doi:10.3390/ijerph192315773

Sexual Function and Quality of Life in Brazilian Transgender Women Following Gender-Affirming Surgery: A Cross-Sectional Study

2022· article· en· W4310232728 on OpenAlexaff
Lísia Maya Monteiro Petry Jardim, Taís Marques Cerentini, Maria Inês Rodrigues Lobato, Ângelo Brandelli Costa, Dhiordan Cardoso da Silva, Karine Schwarz, Anna Martha Vaitses Fontanari, Maiko Abel Schneider, Tiago Elias Rosito, Valentina Lucia La Rosa, Elena Commodari, Patrícia Viana da Rosa

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSexual functionPsychosexual developmentCross-sectional studyQuality of life (healthcare)Sex reassignment surgery (male-to-female)TransgenderUrinary incontinencePsychosocialVitalitySex lifeHuman sexualityMale to femalePsychologyRetrospective cohort studyPsychiatrySurgeryGender studiesNursingDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This cross-sectional and descriptive study aimed to evaluate the sexual function, urinary function, and quality of life of 26 Brazilian trans women who have undergone gender-affirming surgery (GAS) using the gold standard technique (penile inversion vaginoplasty) in the Gender Identity Transdisciplinary Program at Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Brazil, between March 2016 and July 2017. The Female Sexual Function Index, the SF-36 Health Survey, and the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Short Form were used. Regarding their surgical results, 84.6% of the women said they were satisfied, 73.1% were sexually functional, and 15.4% reported urinary incontinence not associated with surgery. Participants also reported a good quality of life, despite low scores of pain and physical vitality. Transgender women in our sample reported a good quality of life and sexual function after GAS. Further studies are required to improve the psychosexual wellbeing of this specific population.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.267
GPT teacher head0.493
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations17
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public HealthSame topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and PolicyFrench-language works237,207