Feasibility and Preliminary Effectiveness of a Novel Cognitive–Behavioral Couple Therapy for Provoked Vestibulodynia: A Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Provoked vestibulodynia (PVD), a recurrent, localized vulvovaginal pain problem, carries a significant psychosexual burden for afflicted women, who report impoverished sexual function and decreased frequency of sexual activity and pleasure. Interpersonal factors such as partner responses to pain, partner distress, and attachment style are associated with pain outcomes for women and with sexuality outcomes for both women and partners. Despite these findings, no treatment for PVD has systematically included the partner. AIMS: This study pilot-tested the feasibility and potential efficacy of a novel cognitive-behavioral couple therapy (CBCT) for couples coping with PVD. METHODS: Couples (women and their partners) in which the woman was diagnosed with PVD (N = 9) took part in a 12-session manualized CBCT intervention and completed outcome measures pre- and post-treatment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was women's pain intensity during intercourse as measured on a numerical rating scale. Secondary outcomes included sexual functioning and satisfaction for both partners. Exploratory outcomes included pain-related cognitions; psychological outcomes; and treatment satisfaction, feasibility, and reliability. RESULTS: One couple separated before the end of therapy. Paired t-test comparisons involving the remaining eight couples demonstrated significant improvements in women's pain and sexuality outcomes for both women and partners. Exploratory analyses indicated improvements in pain-related cognitions, as well as anxiety and depression symptoms, for both members of the couple. Therapists' reported high treatment reliability and participating couples' high participation rates and reported treatment satisfaction indicate adequate feasibility. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment outcomes, along with treatment satisfaction ratings, confirm the preliminary success of CBCT in reducing pain and psychosexual burden for women with PVD and their partners. Further large-scale randomized controlled trials are necessary to examine the efficacy of CBCT compared with and in conjunction with first-line biomedical interventions for PVD.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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".