Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35287046›Full record

ReviewSexual medicine2022

Sexual Health Screening for Gynecologic and Breast Cancer Survivors: A Review and Critical Analysis of Validated Screening Tools.

Innes Tounkel, Shreya Nalubola, Alexandra Schulz, Nisha Lakhi

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Sexual medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. 2024 SOGC, 2024 NCCN, 2022 ESO-ESMO, and 2018 ASCO: a comparison of female cancer survivorship guidelines for the management of sexual health concerns.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Point-of-care assessment of sexual concerns among young adult oncology active patients and survivors.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Innes TounkelNew York Medical College School of Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Valhalla, NY, USA. Electronic address: itounkel@student.touro.edu.
Shreya NalubolaNew York Medical College School of Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Valhalla, NY, USA.
Alexandra SchulzNew York Medical College School of Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Valhalla, NY, USA.
Nisha LakhiNew York Medical College School of Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Valhalla, NY, USA; Richmond University Medical Center, Deptartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Staten Island, NY, USA.
New York Medical College · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionStudies have shown that the sexual health concerns of gynecologic and breast cancer survivors are not adequately being addressed by clinicians.

aimTo provide a comprehensive narrative review of validated sexual health screening tools and aid clinicians in choosing a screening tool that will allow them to best address their patients' sexual health concerns

methodsA review of PubMed and Google Scholar databases was conducted, using search terms "sexual health", "screening", "tools", "cancer", and "survivors" to identify sexual health screening tools meeting the following inclusion criteria: 1) published in a peer-reviewed journal, 2) were written in English, 3) included breast and/or gynecological cancer patient population, 4) included self-reported measure of sexual health and function, and 5) underwent psychometric validation.

main outcome measureCriteria used to evaluate identified screening tools included ability to assess desire, arousal, satisfaction, orgasm, dyspareunia, solo sexual expression, relationship with partner, body image, distress over changes in sexual function, and support systems. Pre and post- treatment comparisons, differentiation between lack of sexual desire and inability, heterosexual bias, diversity in patient population, and ease of scoring were also evaluated.

resultsBased upon the inclusion criteria, the following 10 sexual health screening tools were identified and reviewed: Female Sexual Function Index, European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaires for both Cervical and Endometrial Cancer, Sexual Adjustment and Body Image Scale, Sexual Adjustment and Body Image Scale- Gynecologic Cancer, Sexual Function and Vaginal Changes Questionnaire, Gynaecologic Leiden Questionnaire, Information on Sexual Health: Your Needs after Cancer, Sexual Satisfaction Questionnaire, and Sexual Activity Questionnaire. Most tools assessed satisfaction (n=10), desire (n=9), and dyspareunia (n=8). Fewer addressed objective arousal (n=7), body image/femininity (n=7), partner relationship (n=7), orgasm (n=5), pre/post treatment considerations (n=5), distress (n=4), and solo-sexual expression (n=2). Heterosexual bias (n=3) and failure to differentiate between lack of desire and inability (n=2) were encountered.

conclusionUnderstanding the strengths and limitations of sexual health screening tools can help clinicians more effectively address cancer survivors' sexual health concerns, which is essential in providing comprehensive care and improving quality of life. Screening tools have room for improvement, such as eliminating heterosexual bias and including cancer and treatment-specific questions. Clinicians can use this guide to select the most appropriate screening tool for their patients and begin bridging the gap in sexual healthcare. Tounkel I, Nalubola S, Schulz A, et al. Sexual Health Screening for Gynecologic and Breast Cancer Survivors: A Review and Critical Analysis of Validated Screening Tools. Sex Med 2022;10:100498.

Indexed as

Cancer SurvivorsGynecologyOncologyScreeningSexual Health

Identifiers

PMID35287046
PMCPMC9023241
OpenAlexW4220675211

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.