Comparison of the Sexual Well-Being of Individuals with and Without a Herpes and/or Human Papillomavirus Infection Diagnosis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT. This study compared individuals with and without herpes and/or human papillomavirus (HPV) on several aspects of sexual well-being. We also investigated whether gender and relationship status moderated these relationships. Participants were 183 individuals with herpes and HPV and 299 without a diagnosis who completed measures of sexual activity, sexual concerns, and sexual cognitive–affective factors. Individuals with herpes and HPV reported being less sexually satisfied and were more likely to experience a distressing sexual problem than were those with no sexually transmitted infections. However, they reported high-quality sexual well-being overall and, contrary to prediction, reported more positive sexual well-being compared with individuals without a diagnosis on some dimensions. Outcomes were largely the same regardless of gender and relationship status. The results are discussed in terms of the importance of examining a broad range of factors related to sexuality to understand the potential impact of herpes and HPV on sexual well-being.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it