MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3203588006 · doi:10.3389/fgwh.2021.744748

Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Sexual Concerns During Perimenopause: A Four Session Study Protocol

2021· article· en· W3203588006 sur OpenAlexafffund
Sheryl M. Green, Melissa Furtado

Notice bibliographique

RevueFrontiers in Global Women s Health · 2021
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueMenopause: Health Impacts and Treatments
Établissements canadiensMcMaster UniversitySt. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton
Organismes subventionnairesCanadian Institutes of Health Research
Mots-clésAnxietyVasomotorDepression (economics)Clinical psychologyDistressMedicineSexual dysfunctionPsychologyCognitionPsychiatryInternal medicine

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Background: During the menopausal transition, women often experience physical (e.g., vasomotor symptoms) and emotional (e.g., anxiety and depression) difficulties that significantly impact functioning and overall quality of life. Although sexual concerns (e.g., decreased sexual desire, orgasm), are reported by up to 87% of peri- and post-menopausal women, and are associated with adverse impact on functioning and distress, treatment options that directly target this area are limited, and most often involve medication (e.g., hormone replacement). Effectiveness of these treatments is often defined as improvements in physical symptoms, however, associated psychological and emotional symptoms rarely, if at all, improve. Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) has been proposed as a low-risk treatment for menopausal symptoms with studies showing improvement in frequently reported symptoms (e.g., vasomotor symptoms, depression, anxiety, sleep). Sexual concerns, however, have either not been directly targeted at all in current CBT protocols, or the very few protocols that include sexual concerns, demonstrated modest gains in sexual desire. Methods: This protocol paper outlines the development, design, and implementation of a newly developed CBT for sexual concerns trial during perimenopause (CBT-SC-Peri). Although sexual concerns are prevalent during both the peri- and post-menopausal periods, we will be evaluating the effectiveness of a CBT-SC protocol specifically for perimenopausal women as a means of early intervention. The clinical sample will comprise 82 women aged 40–60 years currently in perimenopause, as per the Stages of Reproductive Aging Workshop (STRAW) definition, and medication stable (if applicable). To ensure participants are experiencing clinically significant sexual concerns, a baseline cut-off score of 26 or lower on the Female Sexual Functioning Index will be utilized. Exclusion criteria include participants with psychotic disorders, or current substance and/or alcohol dependence, or severely depressed/suicidal. The CBT-SC-Peri is a weekly, four session treatment, lasting up to 90 min per session and includes psychoeducation and cognitive and behavioral strategies designed to challenge unhelpful beliefs and promote healthy sexual behaviors. As this is an individual CBT protocol, content will be tailored to address the specific problems relevant for each participant. Eligible women will be placed directly into treatment or on a 4-week waitlist and reassessed prior to starting treatment. The primary outcome (sexual satisfaction), as well as secondary outcomes (desire, arousal, relationship satisfaction, body image, vasomotor symptoms, depression, and anxiety) are assessed at baseline, post-waitlist (for those on waitlist), and post-treatment. Discussion: To our knowledge, this will be the first study to investigate the efficacy of a CBT protocol (CBT-SC-Peri) specifically aimed at improving sexual concerns experienced during perimenopause. If effective, this form of treatment may not only be preferred by some, but necessary for others as consumer demand increases for non-pharmacological treatments for perimenopausal symptoms. Further, this protocol can be integrated into perimenopausal care and will be made available by dissemination to healthcare practitioners. Clinical Trial Registration: Trial # NCT04922385 and Accessible at: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04922385?term=NCT04922385anddraw=2andrank=1 .

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,274
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,079
Tête enseignante GPT0,446
Écart entre enseignants0,367 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations10
Publié2021
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueFrontiers in Global Women s HealthMême sujetMenopause: Health Impacts and TreatmentsTravaux en français237 207