MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402773613 · doi:10.21037/apm-24-77

Sexual health after breast cancer: a clinical practice review

2024· review· en· W4402773613 on OpenAlexaff
Samantha K. F. Kennedy, Selena Mekhaeil, Elwyn Zhang, Niusha Aghadavoudi Jolfaei, Henry C. Y. Wong, Adrian Wai Chan, Shing Fung Lee, Darren Haywood, Deborah Walker, Aalaa Abdou, Ragisha Gopalakrishnan, Helena Karolyne Arruda Guedes, Chia Jie Tan, Carla Thamm, Muna Alkhaifi

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Palliative Medicine · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityWilfrid Laurier UniversityHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineClinical PracticeBreast cancerFamily medicineGynecologyCancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Breast cancer (BC) diagnoses not only present physical challenges but profoundly affect survivors' psychosocial well-being leading to sexual health challenges. This clinical practice review aimed to discuss the current literature and outline the knowledge gaps related to care for sexual health after BC, including survivors' sexual health concerns, as well as available prospective surveillance programs. Current literature on the sexual health challenges of BC survivors was identified and sorted into contributing factors, treatments and interventions, and practice recommendations. This evidence was then used to identify gaps in the literature and make recommendations for future research. BC survivors experience a variety of physical symptoms, such as pain during sex or dyspareunia, which impair sexual well-being. Additionally, dissatisfaction with sexual function may arise due to psychosocial stressors (e.g., depression or body image concerns) and the inverse may worsen psychological well-being. Treatments can have lasting effects that may impact sexual function, often reciprocally related to physical and psychosocial factors. Current treatments for sexual dysfunction involve topical products for vaginal symptoms (e.g., creams, pH-balanced gels, hyaluronic acid or vitamin E suppositories, natural oils, topical estrogen, or lubricants) and various counseling and educational interventions (e.g., mental health counseling, sex therapy, or couples-based psychotherapy). There is a general lack of research considering the ways in which intersectional concerns can impact sexual health experiences after BC. Existing studies do not often consider potential differences in needs that may arise due to ethnicity, age, or socioeconomic background. To address these limitations a significant paradigm shift in survivorship care. This requires moving beyond disease management towards a more holistic, comprehensive, patient-centered approach prioritizing comfort and sexual well-being.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.326
GPT teacher head0.583
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations13
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Palliative MedicineSame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207