Incidence of Post Operative Sexual Dysfunction Following Left Sided Colon and Rectal Surgery in a Surgical Patient Cohort in Northern Saskatchewan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: The long-term complications of colon cancer surgery are now being investigated to a greater extent given the improvement in survival rates for all stages of colon and rectal cancer. Patient quality of life is now playing a significant role in the cancer survivorship and sexual complications are part of that survivorship spectrum. Patients and Methods: A sexual health questionnaire (EORTC SHQ-22 © ) was employed to perform an audit of the sexual complications following surgery. Ethics approval was obtained from the university of Saskatchewan and a telephonic interview was conducted. This was pre-empted by a telephonic consent script by our medical office assistant. Results: Twenty-two percent of the patients were deceased, and 52% of the patients could not be reached telephonically. The rates of sexual complications were well within the published rates from tertiary centers employing colorectal specialists. Discussion: Sexual complications are a newer form of complications given the proximity of the pelvic parasympathetic plexus to the sacral promontory. The complication rates for our community surgeons are equivalent to that of colorectal specialists from tertiary centres. Further explanation of the sexual complication risks should form part of the discussion for all surgeons undertaking colon or rectal surgery. Limitation: The lack of documented pre-operative sexual dysfunction and a small patient cohort hampered the findings of this study. Conclusion: The sexual complication rates at our institute are well within published rates of sexual dysfunction, post colonic and rectal surgery. Keywords: sexual complication, colonic surgery, sexual quality of life, surgical audit
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".