MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Multilevel Local Anesthetic Nerve Blockade for the Treatment of Generalized Vulvodynia: A Pilot Study

2012· article· en· W1703381222 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
John S. McDonald, Andrea J. Rapkin

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Sexual Medicine · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVulvodyniaLocal anestheticMedicineMcGill Pain QuestionnaireBeck Depression InventoryNerve blockAnesthesiaPsychologyPelvic painSurgeryPsychiatryVisual analogue scaleAnxiety

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Vulvodynia is a common pain disorder among women with a major impact on sexual functioning and quality of life. There are few published studies addressing the treatment of the pain of generalized vulvodynia or of generalized vulvodynia accompanying localized pain in the region of the vulvar vestibule. AIM: A prospective, noncontrolled pilot study was conducted to assess the efficacy of a novel treatment using caudal epidural, pudendal nerve block, and vulvar infiltration of local anesthetic agents. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome measure was vulvar pain as assessed by the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ). The secondary outcome measures were depressed mood evaluated with the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) and sexual functioning assessed by the Female Sexual Functioning Inventory (FSFI). METHODS: Thirty-two women with vulvodynia met inclusion criteria and 26 women completed the study. The protocol included five treatment sessions with multilevel local anesthetic nerve blockade and a follow-up contact or visit 2-3 months later. RESULTS: There were significant improvements in vulvar pain as determined by both the sensory and affective components of the MPQ and in depression as assessed by the BDI. However, there were no changes in sexual functioning on the FSFI. CONCLUSION: Serial multilevel nerve block administered for the treatment of vulvodynia is a neurophysiologically based modality that may be effective and merits a placebo-controlled study.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: Non-randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.149
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.219 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations31
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Sexual MedicineSame topicSexual function and dysfunction studiesFrench-language works237,207