MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1925002899 · doi:10.1111/jsm.12863

Cognitive, Psychophysical, and Neural Correlates of Vulvar Pain in Primary and Secondary Provoked Vestibulodynia: A Pilot Study

2015· article· en· W1925002899 on OpenAlexafffund
Katherine S. Sutton, Caroline F. Pukall, Conor J. Wild, Ingrid S. Johnsrude, Susan Chamberlain

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Sexual Medicine · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsKingston General HospitalQueen's University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaNational Vulvodynia Association
KeywordsVulvodyniaNeural correlates of consciousnessPsychologyCognitionClinical psychologyMedicinePsychiatryPelvic painSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Provoked vestibulodynia (PVD) is a common condition characterized by localized, provoked pain that can be present since first vaginal penetration attempt (primary) or can develop after a period of pain-free penetration (secondary). Research has demonstrated psychosocial and psychophysical differences between women with these subtypes of PVD, but the question of whether neural responses to pain also differ remains to be investigated. AIM: This study aims to examine whether cognitive, psychophysical, and neural responses to vulvar pressure pain differ between women with PVD1 and PVD2. METHODS: Women with PVD1 and PVD2 were compared for group differences using multiple modalities, including questionnaires, psychophysical testing, and neuroimaging. Pain ratings were held constant across groups, rather than amount of pressure applied. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Demographics, sexual functioning, four questionnaires examining anxiety and catastrophizing, quantitative sensory testing at the vulvar vestibule using a vulvalgesiometer, and functional and structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). RESULTS: Findings suggest that women with PVD1 are more anxious and that they catastrophize more about their vulvar and nonvulvar pain than women with PVD2. Overall, MRI results demonstrated structural and functional similarities to other chronic pain findings for both groups of women. Gray matter (GM) density also differed between groups: women with PVD1 showed significant decreases in GM throughout areas associated with pain processing. Functionally, between-groups differences were found during painful vulvar stimulation despite lower pressures applied to the vulva for women with PVD1 because of their heightened sensitivity; the determination of the level of vulvar pressure to elicit pain was based on subjective ratings. CONCLUSIONS: Findings are limited by sample size and liberal alpha values; however, future research is certainly warranted based on the preliminary findings of this study suggesting both similarities and differences between PVD1 and PVD2. Overall, women with PVD1 seem to fare worse on several pain-related and psychosocial variables compared with women with PVD2.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations33
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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