The vulvalgesiometer as a device to measure genital pressure-pain threshold
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The construction and application of the vulvalgesiometer are described. This manually-applied device allows for the quantifiable measurement of pressure-pain thresholds in the external female genital region. A set of five vulvalgesiometers exerting pressures from 3 to 950 g was used in two studies. The goal of the first study was to examine the ability of the vulvalgesiometers to discriminate between women with and without provoked vestibulodynia (PVD). In a matched sample of affected and non-affected women, women with PVD exhibited significantly lower vestibular pressure-pain thresholds as compared to control women. As well, approximately half the sample of women with PVD described the sensation elicited at pressure-pain threshold as similar to the pain experienced during sexual intercourse. The goal of the second study was to investigate the inter-rater reliability of the vulvalgesiometers. In this separate sample of women with and without PVD, each participant was tested for pressure-pain threshold by two different investigators at different times. Results demonstrated high levels of inter-rater reliability, indicating that the vulvalgesiometers can be consistently used by different investigators. Further, results indicated significant negative correlations between pressure-pain thresholds and pain intensity ratings recorded during the cotton-swab test, suggesting that the lower the threshold, the higher the pain ratings during vestibular palpation. The vulvalgesiometers can be utilized for several purposes, including treatment outcome studies and measuring the degree of PVD severity.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".