Patient satisfaction with care for genital herpes: insights from a global survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe patient experiences and views regarding genital herpes management. METHODS: Between February 2002 and January 2003, subjects with genital herpes were recruited via the International Herpes Alliance website and through banners on additional sites. Surveys were available in English, French, Spanish, Italian, and German and assessed views on access to care, diagnosis, related emotional experiences, educational resources, counselling, pharmacotherapy, and satisfaction with care. RESULTS: 2075 patient responses from 78 countries were analysed. 49% reported their diagnosis was by culture (or other direct detection) and 9% by antibody test, while 34% reported they had been diagnosed by examination alone. 65% used a prescription antiviral therapy, 18% a topical antiviral therapy, and 17% an alternative therapy. Of 901 subjects who reported on frequency of antiviral use, only 30% reported a frequency consistent with a suppressive regimen while 59% of respondents said they would be likely to take daily therapy if it reduced the frequency of outbreaks. Patient satisfaction with management of physical symptoms was independently associated with duration of initial visit >or=15 minutes (adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 4.52), receiving a prescription (adj OR = 2.34) and receipt of a brochure/fact sheet (adj OR = 2.14). Satisfaction with attention to emotional issues also correlated with the first two of these factors. CONCLUSIONS: Genital herpes management may be improved by including the use of confirmatory laboratory testing, employing a full range of antiviral therapy options, providing educational materials, and committing more time to counselling at the initial visit.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".