The Vulvar Pain Assessment Questionnaire inventory
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Millions suffer from chronic vulvar pain (ie, vulvodynia). Vulvodynia represents the intersection of 2 difficult subjects for health care professionals to tackle: sexuality and chronic pain. Those with chronic vulvar pain are often uncomfortable seeking help, and many who do so fail to receive proper diagnoses. The current research developed a multidimensional assessment questionnaire, the Vulvar Pain Assessment Questionnaire (VPAQ) inventory, to assist in the assessment and diagnosis of those with vulvar pain. A large pool of items was created to capture pain characteristics, emotional/cognitive functioning, physical functioning, coping skills, and partner factors. The item pool was subsequently administered online to 288 participants with chronic vulvar pain. Of those, 248 participants also completed previously established questionnaires that were used to evaluate the convergent and discriminant validity of the VPAQ. Exploratory factor analyses of the item pool established 6 primary scales: Pain Severity, Emotional Response, Cognitive Response, and Interference with Life, Sexual Function, and Self-Stimulation/Penetration. A brief screening version accompanies a more detailed version. In addition, 3 supplementary scales address pain quality characteristics, coping skills, and the impact on one's romantic relationship. When relationships among VPAQ scales and previously researched scales were examined, evidence of convergent and discriminant validity was observed. These patterns of findings are consistent with the literature on the multidimensional nature of vulvodynia. The VPAQ can be used for assessment, diagnosis, treatment formulation, and treatment monitoring. In addition, the VPAQ could potentially be used to promote communication between patients and providers, and point toward helpful treatment options and/or referrals.
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 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 | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it