MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067866776 · doi:10.1080/0092623x.2014.931315

Differential Associations of Communication and Love in Heterosexual, Lesbian, and Bisexual Women's Perceptions and Experiences of Chronic Vulvar and Pelvic Pain

2014· article· en· W2067866776 on OpenAlexaff
Karen L. Blair, Caroline F. Pukall, Kelly B. Smith, Jaclyn Cappell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sex & Marital Therapy · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaQueen's University
FundersLesbian Health Fund
KeywordsLesbianPsychologyPerceptionPelvic painHeterosexualityClinical psychologyPain perceptionVulvodyniaSex organHomosexualityMedicinePhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The literature on genital and pelvic pain has largely focused on heterosexual women. An online study examined characteristics of vulvar pain in 839 lesbian, bisexual, and heterosexual women 18-45 years of age and investigated associations between relationship qualities such as love and communication with participants' perceptions of pain's influence on relationships. Characteristics of vulvar pain were similar across groups. Groups differed in how they perceived pain to impact their relationships, such that better communication for same-sex couples and more love for mixed-sex couples was associated with the perception of their pain as having less of an effect on their relationship functioning.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations43
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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