MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2226080671 · doi:10.1016/j.jsxm.2015.12.003

Effectiveness of Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy and Physical Therapy for Provoked Vestibulodynia: A Randomized Pilot Study

2016· article· en· W2226080671 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 · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaKingston Health Sciences CentreQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitive behavioral therapyRandomized controlled trialCognitive therapyPsychotherapistCognitionPsychologyBehavioral therapyClinical psychologyMedicinePhysical therapyPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Non-medical and non-surgical treatments for provoked vestibulodynia target psychological, sexual, and pelvic floor muscle factors that maintain the condition. AIM: The goal of the study was to compare the effects of cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) and physical therapy (PT) on pain and psychosexual outcomes in women with provoked vestibulodynia. METHODS: In a clinical trial, 20 women with provoked vestibulodynia were randomly assigned to receive CBT or comprehensive PT. Participants were assessed before treatment, after treatment, and at 6-month follow-up by gynecologic examination, structured interviews, and standardized questionnaires measuring pain, psychological, and sexual variables. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcome measurements were based on an adaptation of the Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials recommendations. The primary outcome was change in intercourse pain intensity. Secondary outcomes included pain during the cotton swab test, pain with various sexual and non-sexual activities, and sexual functioning and negative pain cognitions. RESULTS: The two treatment groups demonstrated significant decreases in vulvar pain during sexual intercourse, with 70% and 80% of participants in the CBT and PT groups demonstrating a moderate clinically important decrease in pain (≥30%) after treatment. Participants in the two groups also had significant improvements in pain during the gynecologic examination, the percentage of painful intercourse attempts, the percentage of activities resulting in pain, and the ability to continue intercourse without stopping because of pain. Psychological outcomes, including pain catastrophizing and perceived control over pain, also showed improvement in the two groups. Significant improvements in sexual functioning were observed only in participants who completed CBT. Few between-group differences were identified other than the PT group showing earlier improvements in some outcomes. Nearly all improvements were maintained at the 6-month follow-up. CONCLUSION: The results of the study suggest that CBT and PT can lead to clinically meaningful improvements in pain and areas of psychosexual functioning.

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)0.004
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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.317
Threshold uncertainty score0.310

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.283 · 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