MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061084001 · doi:10.1517/14656566.5.5.1045

Pharmacotherapy for sexual dysfunction in women

2004· review· en· W2061084001 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsVancouver General HospitalUniversity of British Columbia Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiopsychosocial modelSexual dysfunctionSexual arousalMedicinePharmacotherapyNormativeClinical psychologySexual desireArousalFemale sexual dysfunctionHuman sexualityPsychotherapistPsychiatryPsychologySexual behaviorNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the setting of multiple studies claiming a high prevalence of sexual problems amongst women, new conceptualisation of the sexual response in women and definitions of sexual dysfunction, which reflect the need for biopsychosocial management, are being developed. The biological underpinnings of the sexual response in women may be influenced by environmental factors, as well as by medications, disease processes and normative changes in endogenous hormones. Psychological factors can alter both the physiological processes and the experience of sexual response. The new models clarify the importance of sexual motivations other than desire, sexual arousability and subtypes of arousal disorder. The role of pharmacotherapy to potentially augment desire, arousability, genital congestion and to lessen the pain of chronic dyspareunia must be envisaged within the holistic biopsychosocial model.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.943
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.139
GPT teacher head0.467
Teacher spread0.328 · 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