REPORTS: Summary of the Recommendations on Sexual Dysfunctions in Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Women's sexual dysfunction includes reduced interest/incentives for sexual engagement, difficulties with becoming subjectively and/or genitally aroused, difficulties in triggering desire during sexual engagement, orgasm disorder, and sexual pain. AIM: To update the recommendations published in 2004, from the 2nd International Consultation on Sexual Medicine (ICSM) pertaining to the diagnosis and treatment of women's sexual dysfunctions. METHODS: A third international consultation in collaboration with the major sexual medicine associations assembled over 186 multidisciplinary experts from 33 countries into 25 committees. Twenty one experts from six countries contributed to the Recommendations on Sexual Dysfunctions in Women. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Expert opinion was based on grading of evidence-based medical literature, widespread internal committee discussion, public presentation, and debate. RESULTS: A comprehensive assessment of medical, sexual, and psychosocial history is recommended for diagnosis and management. Indications for general and focused pelvic genital examination are identified. Evidence based recommendations for further revisions of definitions for sexual disorders are given. An evidence based approach to management is provided. Extensive references are provided in the full ICSM reports. CONCLUSIONS: There remains a need for more research and scientific reporting on the optimal management of women's sexual dysfunctions including multidisciplinary approaches.
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 | 0.025 | 0.070 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.011 |
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".