MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Prospective Study of Pelvic Floor Physical Therapy: Pain and Psychosexual Outcomes in Provoked Vestibulodynia

2009· article· en· W2145900905 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

VenueThe Journal of Sexual Medicine · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsKingston General HospitalQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVulvodyniaPhysical therapyMedicinePain catastrophizingPelvic painPelvic floorProspective cohort studySexual functionAnxietySexual intercourseChronic painPsychiatryPopulationSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Research suggests that increased tension in the pelvic floor muscles of women with provoked vestibulodynia (PVD, the most common form of chronic vulvar pain) may play an important role in maintaining and exacerbating their pain. However, no prospective studies of pelvic floor physical therapy (PFPT) for PVD have been carried out. AIM: This study prospectively examined the effectiveness of a PFPT intervention in treating the pain and sexual and psychological components of PVD, and determined predictors of greater treatment success. METHODS: Thirteen women with PVD completed eight sessions of PFPT. Participants were assessed at pre- and post-treatment via gynecological examinations, vestibular pain threshold testing, structured interviews, and standardized questionnaires. A 3-month follow-up interview assessed any further changes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcome measures included: vestibular pain thresholds, gynecological examination and intercourse pain ratings, sexual function and intercourse frequency, mental health, negative pain cognitions, and success rates. RESULTS: Following treatment, participants had significantly higher vestibular pain thresholds and significantly lower pain ratings during the gynecological examination. Participants reported significant reductions in pain intensity during intercourse and were able to engage in significantly more pain-free activities. Although overall sexual function significantly improved, various components of sexual function and frequency of intercourse did not. Participants' mental health did not significantly improve; however, pain catastrophizing and pain-related anxiety significantly decreased. The treatment was considered to be successful for 10 of the 13 participants, and predictors of greater treatment success included greater reductions in helplessness and a longer period of time in treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Results provide preliminary support for the effectiveness of PFPT in treating the pain of PVD, as well as some of the sexual and cognitive correlates of PVD. The results also indicate the need for large-scale, randomized studies of the effectiveness of PFPT in comparison and in conjunction with other treatment options.

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)0.002
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 score0.274
Threshold uncertainty score0.404

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.306 · 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