eDiary and Female Sexual Distress Scale<sup>©</sup>in Evaluating Distress in Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder (HSDD)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sex-related distress is integral to the diagnosis of hypoactive sexual desire disorder (HSDD). This article describes the results of three prospective, non-treatment validation studies (two North American and one European), each testing over 200 participants with HSDD, other types of female sexual dysfunction (FSD), or no FSD in which the 12-item Female Sexual Distress Scale(©) (FSDS(©)), the 13-item FSDS-Revised(©)(FSDS-R(©)), and a single question asked using a daily electronic diary (the eDiary For HSDD Trials(©); eDiary) were used to measure sex-related distress. FSDS results with 30- and seven-day recall were equivalent. The results observed with FSDS-R Item 13 (a single question assessing concern due to low sexual desire) were comparable to the FSDS. Mean eDiary monthly distress scores were closer to the minimum possible score (equivalent to "a little bit" of distress) and were about twice as variable as FSDS or FSDS-R Item 13 scores in participants with HSDD. All three measures confirmed that there is more distress in women with HSDD compared to women with no sexual dysfunction at all time points, demonstrating discriminant validity.
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 | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".