MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4360599832 · doi:10.2196/41831

Sexual Health Outcomes of Adolescent and Young Adult Colorectal Cancer Survivors and Their Partners: Protocol of a Dyadic Mixed Methods Study

2023· article· en· W4360599832 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chiara Acquati, Daniela Wittmann, Michael Roth, Allison Rosen, L. Christian Carr, Zachary Gresham, Elena Ionescu

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSexual Medicine Society of North America
KeywordsSexual dysfunctionPsychosocialClinical psychologyDistressYoung adultSexual functionHuman sexualityBiopsychosocial modelPsychologyReproductive healthMedicinePopulationPsychiatryGerontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Sexual dysfunction represents a critical aspect of quality of life for adolescent and young adult cancer survivors. Studies have consistently documented that adolescents and young adults report greater psychological and physical morbidity than older survivors and healthy peers, including elevated rates of sexual dysfunction, often accompanied by lower satisfaction with sex life and delays in meeting sexual milestones. Moreover, sexual dysfunction, body image concerns, and fertility status affect their confidence in being both physically and emotionally intimate. Despite this evidence, limited research has investigated the influence of psychosocial and interpersonal factors on sexual health outcomes reported by this group. This constitutes a significant gap in the provision of comprehensive sexual health care for adolescent- and young adult-onset cancer survivors, especially since greater emphasis has been recently placed on the biopsychosocial model of sexuality and dyadic approaches to intervention and treatment. In comparison to other cancer types, the incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) has been increasing at an alarming rate for the adolescent and young adult group. Patients with early-onset CRC experience elevated rates of sexual dysfunction, psychological distress, and social and physical burden, often resulting from issues with bowel control, incontinence, and body image. OBJECTIVE: This study uses an explanatory sequential mixed methods approach to (1) characterize sexual function, sexual distress, dyadic coping, infertility-related distress, relationship and mental health outcomes of adolescent and young adult CRC survivors within the first 5 years post diagnosis and their partners; (2) examine the reciprocal influence of sexual function and dyadic coping behaviors on sexual distress; and (3) identify interpersonal or couple characteristics associated with coping with sexual dysfunction and its associated distress. METHODS: Participating couples (n=60) will complete a quantitative web-based survey investigating sexual function, sexual distress, dyadic coping, infertility-related distress, emotional functioning, relationship satisfaction, and body image (cancer survivors only). A subset of 20 couples will participate in an in-depth dyadic interview with 2 members of the research team to further explore couple-based strategies implemented to cope with cancer-related sexual dysfunction and distress. RESULTS: The study received institutional review board approval. Recruitment and enrollment of couples began in July 2022. CONCLUSIONS: Results will provide a deeper understanding of the challenges couples experience as they navigate sexual intimacy after CRC treatment by highlighting the role of interpersonal processes. These findings will inform a dyadic intervention for young couples at risk of greater sexual distress in the aftermath of CRC. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/41831.

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)0.035
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.185

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0350.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.004
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.003

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 head0.307
GPT teacher head0.622
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life→French-language works237,207→