Provoked Vestibulodynia: Does Pain Intensity Correlate with Sexual Dysfunction and Dissatisfaction?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Provoked vestibulodynia (PVD) is suspected to be the most frequent cause of vulvodynia in premenopausal women. Previous research has been inconclusive as to whether higher vulvovaginal pain ratings are associated with lower sexual function and satisfaction in women with PVD. Whether pain intensity correlates with sexual impairment is an important question given its implications for treatment recommendations. AIM: To examine the associations among self-reported and objective pain measurements, sexual function, and sexual satisfaction in a large combined clinical and community sample of premenopausal women diagnosed with PVD. METHODS: Ninety-eight women with PVD underwent a cotton-swab test, a vestibular friction pain measurement, and a vestibular pressure-pain threshold measurement. In addition to sociodemographics, participants completed measurements of pain, sexual function, and sexual satisfaction. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Self-report measurements were the pain numerical rating scale (0-10), the McGill-Melzack Pain Questionnaire, the Female Sexual Function Index, and the Global Measure of Sexual Satisfaction. Objective measurements were pain during a cotton-swab test, pain during a vestibular friction procedure, and the vestibular pressure-pain threshold measurement. RESULTS: Age and relationship duration were significantly correlated with the Female Sexual Function Index total score (r = -0.31, P < .01; and r = -0.22, P < .05, respectively). When controlling for age, intercourse-related pain intensity, pain during the cotton-swab test, pain during vestibular friction, the vestibular pressure-pain threshold, and the McGill-Melzack Pain Questionnaire sensory and affective subscale scores were not significantly associated with sexual function and satisfaction in women with PVD. CONCLUSION: The findings show that in women with PVD, self-report and objective pain ratings are not associated with sexual function and satisfaction. The results support the biopsychosocial nature of PVD and underscore the importance of a patient-focused multidisciplinary treatment approach for 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 | 0.005 |
| 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) | 0.004 | 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".