Sex and Gender Identity Disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The sex and gender identity disorders of the DSM are reviewed. The major male and female sexual dysfunctions, concerns, and problems are described, including assessment, diagnostic considerations, and causes of these difficulties. Controversies surrounding how to conceptualize sexual problems are discussed, as are theoretical and practical problems of classification in the DSM. Psychogenic, interpersonal, psychosocial, and organic factors in the development of the sexual dysfunctions are reviewed. Such distinctions are more accurate in theory than in practice, where sexual problems are typically multi-determined. Sexual problems tend to be intertwined, as when difficulties with arousal and lubrication lead to pain on intercourse as well as lack of orgasm. The importance of appreciating the context in which clients/patients, their partners, and clinicians come to define sexual and gender difficulties as pathological is underscored for each of the sexual and gender problems. The sex script defining “normal” sexuality and gender provides the social backdrop for viewing and diagnosing other forms of sexual and gender expression as pathological. A variety of other sexual problems, including sexual disappointment, the pain of affairs, infertility, and are not listed in the DSM but may lead to patients presenting in clinicians' offices. Controversies surrounding the paraphilias, the need to distinguish between normophilic and paraphilic interactions, and the implications of such distinctions are discussed. Gender identity disorders are outlined, including the controversies surrounding its inclusion and revision process in the DSM, and the emergence of a transgender community's reaction to diagnostic labeling.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.004 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".