A Sexual Health Self-Management Intervention (Psychosexual Educational Partners Program) for Couples With a History of Breast and Gynecological Cancer: Mixed Methods Feasibility Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Women with breast or gynecological cancer and their intimate partners often face sexual problems in their relationships. Accessing care for sexual health problems is challenging for several reasons (eg, limited trained health care providers and privacy concerns), making self-management approaches highly promising. OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the feasibility of the Psychosexual Educational Partners Program (PEPP), a 6-week sexual health self-management intervention for women treated for breast or gynecological cancer and their intimate partners. METHODS: A mixed methods single-arm, repeated measures design was used for this study. An attrition rate of ≤25% was considered feasible. Intervention experiences were assessed via interviews, and preliminary effects on the Dyadic Sexual Communication Scale, relationship quality measured by the Revised Dyadic Adjustment Scale, and sexual health measured by PROMIS Sexual Function and Satisfaction version 2.0 were explored quantitatively. RESULTS: In total, 7 (77%) of the 9 couples completed the study through week 6 and provided both pre- and poststudy data, resulting in an attrition rate of 22% (2/9), which met the feasibility benchmark for attrition of 25% or less. The following two themes emerged: (1) PEPP helped us start difficult conversations and impacted emotional and physical intimacy. The intervention adherence was 85%. Dyadic Sexual Communication Scale scores improved with a mean change score of 6.64 (SD 9.65) and a Cohen d of 0.69. Revised Dyadic Adjustment Scale scores declined slightly, with a mean change score of -0.93 (SD 3.41) and a Cohen d of 0.27. PROMIS Sexual Function and Satisfaction version 2.0 scores showed small improvements for women on desire, with a mean change score of 2.36 (SD 6.24) and a Cohen d of 0.38. Similarly, for women, the satisfaction mean change score was 2.20 (SD 8.22) and a Cohen d of 0.27. For intimate partners, a small effect was found for desire, but in this instance, desire decreased with a mean change score of -1.57 (SD 6.09) and a Cohen d of 0.26. CONCLUSIONS: The findings support PEPP as a feasible intervention for improving sexual communication. If proven effective in a randomized controlled trial, it has the potential to address the critical gap in supportive care among female cancer survivors. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05070299; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05070299.
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 | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".