The searches identified 580 papers (Fig. 115.1). However, only ten mapped to the search terms and eligibility criteria. The current systematic reviews were also examined to gain further knowledge about the subject. Five hundred and eighty papers were excluded due to not conforming to eligibility criteria or adding to the evidence for psychosexual pathways or components of pathways for men with prostate cancer, post-surgery. Results were presented as per PRISMA criteria . Of the ten papers left, relevant abstracts were identified and the full papers obtained (all of which were in English), to quality assure against criteria. There was significant heterogeneity within studies, including clinical topic, numbers, outcomes, as a results a narrative review was thought to be best.
- 1.Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ (Online). 2009;339:332–6.Google Scholar
- 2.Thomas R, Williams M, Bellamy P. A polyphenol rich whole food supplement reduces PSA progression in men with prostate cancer in a double blind placebo controlled RCT-the UK National Pomi-T Study. Support Care Cancer. 2013;21:S33–4.Google Scholar