↓ Skip to main content

Breast-Specific Sensuality and Sexual Function in Cancer Survivorship: Does Surgical Modality Matter?

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Surgical Oncology, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
46 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 Mendeley
Title
Breast-Specific Sensuality and Sexual Function in Cancer Survivorship: Does Surgical Modality Matter?
Published in
Annals of Surgical Oncology, June 2017
DOI 10.1245/s10434-017-5905-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jennifer S. Gass, Michaela Onstad, Sarah Pesek, Kristin Rojas, Sara Fogarty, Ashley Stuckey, Christina Raker, Don S. Dizon

Abstract

More early-staged breast cancer patients are choosing mastectomy. No studies have addressed breast-specific sensuality (BSS), defined as the breast's role during intimacy. We explored BSS among women undergoing lumpectomy (L), mastectomy alone (M), or with reconstruction (MR) and analyzed the association of surgical modality with sexual function. Women undergoing breast cancer surgery between 2000 and 2013 were eligible for survey using investigator-generated questions and the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI). Demographic and surgical data were collected by chart review. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to analyze FSFI scores, and χ (2) or Fisher's exact tests were used for categorical data. Of 453 invited participants, 268 (59%) completed the survey. Of these, 69.4, 22.4, and 8.2% underwent L, MR, or M, respectively. The importance of the breast/chest wall during intimacy declined significantly regardless of surgical modality (L 83-74%, p = 0.0006; M 95-47%, p = 0.003; MR 93-77%, p = 0.002). No difference in sexual function was found between L, MR, and M (median FSFI score 28.2, 27.5, 25.9, respectively; p = 1.0). Comparing L versus MR, higher FSFI scores resulted with appearance satisfaction (29.0 vs. 22.6 p = 0.002) and preserved BSS as pleasurable breast caress (28.8 vs. 26.5, p = 0.04) and the breast as part of intimacy (28.8 vs. 24.8, p = 0.1). Breast cancer surgery is associated with lowered BSS. However, BSS and appearance satisfaction scores are better for L and appear to correlate with improved sexual function postoperatively. These data may guide surgical counseling and contribute to survivorship outcomes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 58 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 16%
Student > Bachelor 9 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 9%
Researcher 4 7%
Student > Master 3 5%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 20 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 29%
Psychology 5 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Unspecified 2 3%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 21 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 38. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 March 2020.
All research outputs
#920,570
of 22,992,311 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#92
of 6,529 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,798
of 317,378 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#3
of 69 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,992,311 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,529 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 317,378 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 69 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.