Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39844138›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2025

Implementation of a sexual health clinic in an oncology setting: patient and provider perspectives.

Andrew G Matthew, Taylor Incze, Elisa Stragapede, Steven Guirguis, Sarah E Neil-Sztramko, Dean S Elterman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Exploring the use of a youth specific screening tool in hematological cancer care: perspectives from young adult patients and healthcare professionals.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    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

6 authors.

Andrew G MatthewDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, 700 University Avenue, 6th Floor, Toronto, ON, M5G 1Z6, Canada. andrew.matthew@uhn.ca.
Taylor InczeDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, 700 University Avenue, 6th Floor, Toronto, ON, M5G 1Z6, Canada.
Elisa StragapedeDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, 700 University Avenue, 6th Floor, Toronto, ON, M5G 1Z6, Canada.
Steven GuirguisDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, 700 University Avenue, 6th Floor, Toronto, ON, M5G 1Z6, Canada.
Sarah E Neil-SztramkoFaculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4K1, Canada.
Dean S EltermanDivision of Urology, Department of Surgery, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, M5T 2SB, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSexual dysfunction is prevalent among cancer survivors, significantly impacting patient and partner quality of life. Despite this, sexual health clinics (SHCs) remain rare in cancer centres across Canada. An innovative clinic was developed at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre in Toronto, Canada to address this significant gap in survivorship care. This study examines factors affecting the provision of sexual healthcare and the implementation of a sexual health clinic within a large urban centre.

methodsThe Quality Implementation Framework was used to explicate patient and provider experience and identify barriers and facilitators to integrating sexual healthcare into routine cancer care workflows. Healthcare providers and patients representing selected cancer types (prostate, cervical, ovarian, testicular, bladder, kidney, and head and neck cancer) participated in semi-structured interviews. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed using the Framework qualitative analysis protocol.

resultsThe analysis identified three organizing domains and ten themes that describe the unique aspects of the sexual healthcare experience and critical factors for sexual health implementation. Both patients and providers described a lack of sexual health support in the oncology setting and emphasized the need for comprehensive and personalized care. Limitations of current care provision included mutual silence between patients and providers due to discomfort in discussing sexual issues, insufficient provider confidence in delivering optimal sexual healthcare, and constraints related to space and time. Key Factors for implementing a sexual health clinic in oncology emphasized the importance of having a dedicated clinic, flexibility in service delivery, proactive patient engagement, and ongoing staff education.

conclusionsFindings highlight significant challenges in addressing sexual health in an oncology setting, underscoring the need for specialized sexual health clinics that are integrated with, but distinct from, routine oncology care. This study further emphasizes the need for incorporating sexual healthcare in survivorship programs as well as the necessity of conducting thorough implementation research, involving multiple stakeholders, prior to launching new programs.

Indexed as

Ambulatory Care FacilitiesNeoplasmsSexual Dysfunction, PhysiologicalSexual HealthAdultAgedAttitude of Health PersonnelFemaleHealth PersonnelHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedOntarioQualitative ResearchCancer survivorshipCFIRImplementation researchOncosexologySexual health

Identifiers

PMID39844138
PMCPMC11756131

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.