A Comparison of Demographic and Psychosexual Characteristics of Women With Primary Versus Secondary Provoked Vestibulodynia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Provoked vestibulodynia (PVD) is a distressing genital pain condition affecting approximately 12% of premenopausal women. It has been speculated that primary (ie, lifelong) and secondary (ie, acquired) PVD may represent 2 distinct conditions with different etiologies. There is also evidence that primary and secondary PVD subtypes may respond differently to conventional treatments. The goal of this study was to compare the demographic, clinical, and psychosexual characteristics of a large sample of premenopausal women with primary and secondary PVD. METHODS: A total of 132 premenopausal women (n=42 primary; n=90 secondary) with PVD who sought treatment in a Multidisciplinary Vulvodynia Program completed demographic questions and a battery of validated self-report measures before treatment. RESULTS: Women with primary PVD had a longer duration of PVD as well as more time before diagnosis. Women with secondary PVD reported significantly more clitoral hood pain, higher overall vestibular pain levels, more overall sexual dysfunction and sex-related distress, and proportionately more intercourse occasions that were painful. Women with primary pain stated they had significantly more dysmenorrhea and were more likely to report that their partners were unaware of their PVD symptoms. There were no significant subtype differences on any psychological measure but a trend towards higher magnification of symptoms in women with secondary PVD. DISCUSSION: Overall the findings suggest some important differences in the characteristics of women with primary versus secondary PVD which may have management-related implications.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".