Sexual Health of Patients in Treatment for Lung Cancer: An Undercover Concern for Patients and Oncologists
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sexual dysfunction (SD) prevalence in lung cancer (LC) patients is largely unknown. This study aims to assess the prevalence of SD among LC patients at our center. We conducted a cross-sectional survey of 69 patients using a questionnaire on sexual activity and satisfaction. Participants were recruited from 1 July 2023 to 30 September 2024 and had to be diagnosed with LC, age > 18 years, able to read, and with at least 1 month of treatment. A total of 61 patients completed the survey, predominantly male (67.2%) with stage IV LC (68.9%). Less than half (45.9%) reported recent sexual activity, while many expressed little to no interest (55.7%) and minimal satisfaction with their sex life (42.8%). The factors affecting sexual satisfaction included fatigue (37.7%) and feelings of anxiety/stress (24.6%). The reasons for decreased sexual activity included a lack of interest (36.4%), difficulties with erection (24.2%), and issues with partners (24.3%). A significant association was found between SD and the perceived impact of LC on sexual life, with higher dysfunction scores linked to more negative reports. SD is common among LC patients. Implementing assessment strategies and interventions may improve the sexual life of these patients.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".