The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Quality of Life and Sexual Functioning in Cervical Cancer Survivors
Abstract
Purpose: To compare quality of life and sexual functioning in cervical cancer survivors treated with either radical hysterectomy and lymph node dissection or radiotherapy. Methods: Women were interviewed at least 5 years after initial treatment for cervical cancer. Eligible women had squamous cell tumors smaller than 6 cm at diagnosis, were currently disease-free, and had either undergone surgery or radiotherapy, but not both. The two treatment groups were then compared using univariate analysis and multivariate linear regression with a control group of age- and race-matched women with no history of cancer. Results: One hundred fourteen patients (37 surgery, 37 radiotherapy, 40 controls) were included for analysis. When compared with surgery patients and controls using univariate analysis, radiation patients had significantly poorer scores on standardized questionnaires measuring health-related quality of life (physical and mental health), psychosocial distress and sexual functioning. The disparity in sexual function remained significant in a multivariate analysis. Univariate and multivariate analyses did not show significant differences between radical hysterectomy patients and controls on any of the outcome measures. Conclusion: Cervical cancer survivors treated with radiotherapy had worse sexual functioning than did those treated with radical hysterectomy and lymph node dissection. In contrast, these data suggest that cervical cancer survivors treated with surgery alone can expect overall quality of life and sexual function not unlike that of peers without a history of cancer.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
WARE, J. E., KOSINSKI, M., & KELLER, S. D. (1996) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/00005650-199603000-00003 · Cited by 17,392
A New Psychosocial Screening Instrument for Use With Cancer Patients
Zabora, J., Brintzenhofeszoc, K., Jacobsen, P., Curbow, B., Piantadosi, S., Hooker, C., Owens, A., & Derogatis, L. (2001) · Psychosomatics · doi:10.1176/appi.psy.42.3.241 · Cited by 440
Cited by
Global cancer in women: burden and trends.
Torre, L. A., Islami, F., Siegel, R. L., Ward, E. M., & Jemal, A. (2017) · Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention · doi:10.1158/1055-9965.epi-16-0858 · Cited by 1,245
Cervical Cancer: An Overview of Pathophysiology and Management
Johnson, C. A., James, D., Marzan, A., & Armaos, M. (2019) · Seminars in Oncology Nursing · doi:10.1016/j.soncn.2019.02.003 · Cited by 382
Sadovsky, R., Basson, R., Krychman, M., Morales, A. M., Schover, L., Wang, R., & Incrocci, L. (2010) · The Journal of Sexual Medicine · doi:10.1111/j.1743-6109.2009.01620.x · Cited by 310
Self-citationBrotto, L. A., Erskine, Y., Carey, M., Ehlen, T., Finlayson, S., Heywood, M., Kwon, J., McAlpine, J., Stuart, G., Thomson, S., et al. (2012) · Gynecologic Oncology · doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2012.01.035 · Cited by 269
A systematic review of sexual concerns reported by gynecological cancer survivors
Abbott-Anderson, K., & Kwekkeboom, K. L. (2012) · Gynecologic Oncology · doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2011.11.030 · Cited by 263
Metadata
- Authors
- Frumovitz, M., Sun, C. C., Schover, L. R., Munsell, M. F., Jhingran, A., Wharton, J. T., Eifel, P., Bevers, T. B., Levenback, C. F., Gershenson, D. M., & Bodurka, D. C.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Oncology
- Published
- 2005-10-20
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 30
- Pages
- 7428-7436
- ISSN
- 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
- 1527-7755
- OpenAlex
- W2131231823
- Cited by
- 426
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 19.25
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Quality of Life and Sexual Functioning in Cervical Cancer Survivors. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2004.00.3996
- The paper
- Frumovitz, M., Sun, C. C., Schover, L. R., Munsell, M. F., Jhingran, A., Wharton, J. T., Eifel, P., Bevers, T. B., Levenback, C. F., Gershenson, D. M., & Bodurka, D. C. (2005). Quality of Life and Sexual Functioning in Cervical Cancer Survivors. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2004.00.3996
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.