MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093180276 · doi:10.1080/713847126

Characteristics of Women with Vulvar Pain Disorders: Responses to a Web-Based Survey

2003· article· en· W2093180276 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

VenueJournal of Sex & Marital Therapy · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVulvodyniaMedicineFibromyalgiaItchingIrritable bowel syndromeSexual abusePelvic painSexual dysfunctionDermatologyPsychiatryPoison controlSurgeryInjury preventionEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents data contributed by 428 highly educated, internet-savvy women who frequented various vulvar pain discussion lists. The age range was in the reproductive years and older and over 90% were Caucasians. No country of origin was given. They had a number of distressing symptoms, including vulvar pain at rest and with contact, burning, itching, redness, and inflammation. Most felt that they had either vulvar vestibulitis, vulvodynia, or both, although they had other vulvar conditions as well. Many felt that yeast infections, stress, antibiotics, infections, and chemicals played a contributing role. There were a number of comorbidities, including irritable bowel syndrome, fibromyalgia, and interstitial cystitis. Sexual abuse was not a major issue. The vulvar pain destroyed or altered then sex lives, lowered their self-esteem, and affected their relationships. Often, they relied upon understanding partners, support groups, and hobbies but not the medical profession for comfort.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score0.398

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.286
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