SynthesisColorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland2026
Sexual dysfunction outcomes and reporting disparities after multimodal treatment for rectal cancer: A systematic review and narrative synthesis.
Synthesis in Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSexual dysfunction is a recognised adverse outcome after rectal cancer treatments, yet reporting is predominantly male-focused, with female sexual dysfunction less consistently assessed or reported. This systematic review aimed to assess sexual health domains studied, examine sex-based reporting disparities, and identify limitations in the current evidence.
methodsA systematic review and narrative synthesis were conducted in accordance with PRISMA and registered with PROSPERO (CRD420251178502). PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, CINAHL Plus, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Library were searched from March 1995 to March 2025, with an updated search to March 2026. Eligible studies included adults treated for rectal cancer in whom sexual function outcomes were assessed using International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) and/or Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI), with additional related patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) accepted where relevant. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2 and MINORS.
resultsTwenty-five studies involving 4,071 patients were included. Participants were predominantly male (65.8%), while women comprised 34.2%. PROM reporting was inconsistent; only eight studies reported both total and domain-level results. Sexual outcomes were most consistently reported for men, particularly erectile and ejaculatory function, whereas female outcomes were often reduced to overall scores. Five studies restricted sexual outcome assessment and analysis to men. Only six reported response rates, and missing PROM data handling was not described. Key contextual variables, including sexual activity, sexual orientation, sexual practices, and menopausal status, were rarely captured.
conclusionsSexual function outcomes after rectal cancer treatment are inconsistently reported, with low certainty. Female sexual dysfunction remains under-represented. Standardised, inclusive sex-specific reporting and development of a core outcome set are needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.