Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 301

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Communicating about patient sexuality and intimacy after cancer: mismatched expectations and unmet needs

Hordern, Amanda J, Street, Annette F·2007·Medical Journal of Australia

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To explore the ways that patients and health professionals communicate about intimate and sexual changes in cancer and palliative care settings. DESIGN: A qualitative study using a three-stage reflexive-inquiry approach, with semi-structured, participant interviews (n = 82); textual analysis of national and international cancer and palliative care clinical practice guidelines (n = 33); and participant feedback at 15 educational forums for cancer patients or health professionals. SETTING: A large Australian public teaching hospital between 2002 and 2005. PARTICIPANTS: 50 patients diagnosed with cancer, and 32 health professionals who had worked in cancer and/or palliative care for a minimum of 12 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Communication about intimacy and sexuality: patients' needs and experiences and health professionals' attitudes and experiences. RESULTS: There were mismatched expectations between patients and health professionals and unmet patient needs in communication about sexuality and intimacy. Most patients sought information, support and practical strategies about how to live with intimate and sexual changes after treatment for cancer, even if their cancer type did not affect fertility or sexual performance. In contrast, many health professionals assumed that patients shared their professional focus on combating the disease, irrespective of the emotional and physical costs to the patient. Health professionals overwhelmingly limited their understanding of patient sexuality to fertility, contraception, menopausal or erectile status. Many stereotypical assumptions were made about patient sexuality, based on age, sex, diagnosis, culture, and partnership status. There was a relationship between providing patient-centred communication about intimacy and sexuality and health professionals' understanding of their own attitudes and beliefs. CONCLUSION: Resources are needed to help health professionals engage in an exploration of their own definitions of intimacy and sexuality and understand how these affect interactions with patients with 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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2007.tb00877.x

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 301

Metadata

Authors
Hordern, A. J., & Street, A. F.
Venue
Medical Journal of Australia
Publisher
AMPCo
Published
2007-03
Volume
186
Issue
5
Pages
224-227
ISSN
  • 0025-729X (ISSN-L)
  • 1326-5377
OpenAlex
W2096305696
Cited by
301
References
0
FWCI
25.38
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: Communicating about patient sexuality and intimacy after cancer: mismatched expectations and unmet needs. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5694/j.1326-5377.2007.tb00877.x
The paper
Hordern, A. J., & Street, A. F. (2007). Communicating about patient sexuality and intimacy after cancer: mismatched expectations and unmet needs. Medical Journal of Australia. https://doi.org/10.5694/j.1326-5377.2007.tb00877.x

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.