The Recurrent Pain and Sexual Sequelae of Provoked Vestibulodynia: A Perpetuating Cycle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Optimal management of provoked vestibulodynia (PVD), thought to be the most common form of chronic dyspareunia, is unclear. AIM: To integrate recent brain data on chronic pain circuitry with stress-induced neuroendocrine mechanisms in the skin and the stress burden (allostatic load) of women with PVD; to also clarify the typical chronicity and negative sexual sequelae associated with PVD; and then review modulation of pain circuitry by cognitive therapy and mindfulness practice and apply to PVD management. Methods. Review of scientific publications in the areas of sexual medicine, pain, brain imaging, gynecology, stress response, mindfulness, and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: (i) A model of PVD to reflect its etiology, typical chronicity, and the detrimental effects on sexual function; (ii) Interventions of sexual rehabilitation based on principles underlying changes associated with CBT and mindfulness practice. RESULTS: A model emerges which reflects how stress-induced changes of pain amplification (central sensitization), characteristic of chronic pain conditions, may impair sexual response in addition to sexual dysfunction that arises from conscious pain avoidance and/or fear-related inattention to sexual cues. Stress from low self-acceptance may be a major component of the allostatic load present in women with PVD, only to be exacerbated by the sexual dysfunction precipitated by the pain of intercourse. Mindfulness-based CBT appears promising to target both the pain and sexual suffering from PVD. CONCLUSION: New findings on brain activity associated with recurrent clinical pain, functional brain changes associated with CBT and mindfulness, plus new data on stress systems within the skin along with data on increased stress load in women with PVD, support the use of mindfulness-based CBT for the recurrent pain and sexual suffering from PVD.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".