Clarifying Vaginal Atrophy’s Impact on Sex and Relationships (CLOSER) survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to determine the emotional and physical impact of vaginal atrophy on North American postmenopausal women and their male partners. METHODS: A weighted sample of 1,000 married or cohabiting North American postmenopausal women aged 55 to 65 years with vaginal discomfort and 1,000 male partners of postmenopausal women aged 55 to 65 years who experienced vaginal discomfort participated in the Clarifying Vaginal Atrophy's Impact on Sex and Relationships (CLOSER) online survey to determine the impact of vaginal discomfort and local estrogen therapy on intimacy, relationships, and women's self-esteem. RESULTS: Vaginal discomfort caused most surveyed North American women to avoid intimacy (58%), experience loss of libido (64%), and experience pain associated with sex (64%). Most surveyed North American men also believed that vaginal discomfort caused their partners to avoid intimacy (78%), experience loss of libido (52%), and find sex painful (59%). Approximately 30% of North American women and men cited vaginal discomfort as the reason they ceased having sex altogether. North American women who used local estrogen therapy to treat their vaginal discomfort reported less painful sex (56%), more satisfying sex (41%), and improved sex life (29%). Most men reported looking forward to having sex (57%) because of their partner's use of local estrogen therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Local estrogen therapy ameliorates the negative impact of vaginal atrophy on the intimate relationships of North American postmenopausal women and their male partners. Additional education and awareness efforts about the symptoms of and available treatments for vaginal atrophy may be of further benefit to North American partners.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".