The Provision of Sexual Health Services to Breast Cancer Survivors in Iran: A Qualitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Sexual health is a significant concern for cancer survivors.This study aims to understand how breast cancer survivors and service providers in Iran perceive and experience sexual health services for breast cancer survivors.Material and methods: The present study used a qualitative approach and conventional content analysis method.Data were collected through the use of unstructured in-depth interviews with participants.The main interview question was how the sexual health of patients is addressed and what services are provided in this regard.Results: Data analysis led to the emergence of two themes entitled passivity in providing sexual health services and physically oriented services provided in the field of body image disorder. Conclusion:The results showed that the sexual health services provided to breast cancer survivors are passive and limited to their expressed complaints.Moreover, while providing body image services is desirable and aligns with global standards in the physical aspect, there appears to be a deficiency in the psychosocial aspect.Providing services using a multidisciplinary approach, training employees about the late effects of cancer, and paying attention to the biopsychosocial aspects of sexual health can improve breast cancer survivors' quality of life.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".