Diagnostic criteria for pudendal neuralgia by pudendal nerve entrapment (Nantes criteria)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: The diagnosis of pudendal neuralgia by pudendal nerve entrapment syndrome is essentially clinical. There are no pathognomonic criteria, but various clinical features can be suggestive of the diagnosis. We defined criteria that can help to the diagnosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A working party has validated a set of simple diagnostic criteria (Nantes criteria). RESULTS: The five essentials diagnostic criteria are: (1) Pain in the anatomical territory of the pudendal nerve. (2) Worsened by sitting. (3) The patient is not woken at night by the pain. (4) No objective sensory loss on clinical examination. (5) Positive anesthetic pudendal nerve block. Other clinical criteria can provide additional arguments in favor of the diagnosis of pudendal neuralgia. Exclusion criteria are also proposed: purely coccygeal, gluteal, or hypogastric pain, exclusively paroxysmal pain, exclusive pruritus, presence of imaging abnormalities able to explain the symptoms. CONCLUSION: The diagnosis of pudendal neuralgia by pudendal nerve entrapment syndrome is essentially clinical. There are no specific clinical signs or complementary test results of this disease. However, a combination of criteria can be suggestive of the diagnosis.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".