MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2050317207 · doi:10.1080/14681990120040078

The effect of a cognitive-behavioral group treatment program on hypoactive sexual desire in women

2001· article· en· W2050317207 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueSexual & Relationship Therapy · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalInstitut universitaire en santé mentale de MontréalUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersHealth Canada
KeywordsCognitionPsychologyClinical psychologyHypoactive sexual desire disorderPsychotherapistCognitive behavioral therapySexual desirePsychiatryHuman sexuality

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present paper describes the first extensive controlled study designed to assess and treat Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder (HSD) following an innovative, short-term, cognitive-behavioral group treatment program. HSD is well known to be among the most complex and difficult sexual disorders to treat. While the clinical literature reports positive treatment outcomes and descriptions of successful sex therapy techniques for sexual desire disorders, most of these are based primarily on single or multiple case studies following various therapeutic approaches. To date, there are no comprehensive controlled treatment outcome studies on the effect cognitive-behavioral treatment has on HSD. Results of this study are presented, as well as some descriptive information on women presenting with HSD. In general, results indicate that the treatment protocol is effective. It not only decreases the symptoms of this sexual disorder, but also improves overall cognitive, behavioral and marital functioning associated with HSD.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.494
Threshold uncertainty score0.626

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.292 · 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