MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060833592 · doi:10.1080/00926230902851256

Pain Ratings, Sensory Thresholds, and Psychosocial Functioning in Women with Provoked Vestibulodynia

2009· article· en· W2060833592 on OpenAlexaff
Katherine S. Sutton, Caroline F. Pukall, Susan Chamberlain

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sex & Marital Therapy · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsKingston General HospitalQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychosocialSomatizationMedicineClinical psychologyPain tolerancePsychologyThreshold of painPhysical therapyInternal medicinePsychiatryAnxiety

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Psychosocial and psychophysical functioning in 25 women with and 25 without provoked vestibulodynia (PVD) were examined. Participants underwent quantitative sensory testing and completed psychosocial measures. Women with PVD displayed lower pain thresholds, higher pain ratings, lower sexual functioning and sexual self-efficacy, and higher levels of somatization and catastrophization than controls. Lower psychosocial functioning correlated with decreased vulvar pressure-pain threshold and increased cotton-swab test pain ratings. For PVD women, decreased sexual function and sexual self-efficacy were associated with higher vulvar pressure-pain ratings. Findings suggest that women with PVD would benefit from treatment that addresses pain-focused and psychosocial components.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations84
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sex & Marital TherapySame topicSexual function and dysfunction studiesFrench-language works237,207