Is androgen deprivation therapy effective in the treatment of sex offenders?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We review the effects of androgen deprivation on the sexual behavior of human males. Although eunuchs have existed in many cultures over the last 4,000 years, there is scant detailed and specific information in the historical record about castration status and sexual behavior. From the literature on modern-day eunuchs who are not sex offenders, we conclude that androgen deprivation reduces sexual desire and behavior, including sexual intercourse. Most men, especially those who did not volunteer for the treatment, experience the side effects as extremely bothersome. Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) receives endorsements from some clinicians who treat sex offenders, and it probably reduces sexual recidivism among men who freely request the procedure, but good evidence is sorely lacking. Men who freely request and persist with ADT are probably an especially low-risk group. Little is known about the effects of sexual or violent recidivism among sex offenders who do not freely request it. Little is known about the long term effects of ADT on sexual behavior in general, and sexual recidivism in particular, or about long-term health effects. Clearly, much more research is needed before ADT has a sufficient scientific basis to be relied upon as a principal component of sex offender treatment.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".