Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of the International Society for the Study of Women's Sexual Health expert consensus panel was to develop a concise, clinically relevant, evidence-based review of the epidemiology, physiology, pathogenesis, diagnosis, and treatment of hypoactive sexual desire disorder (HSDD), a sexual dysfunction affecting approximately 10% of adult women. Etiologic factors include conditions or drugs that decrease brain dopamine, melanocortin, oxytocin, and norepinephrine levels and augment brain serotonin, endocannabinoid, prolactin, and opioid levels. Symptoms include lack or loss of motivation to participate in sexual activity due to absent or decreased spontaneous desire, sexual desire in response to erotic cues or stimulation, or ability to maintain desire or interest through sexual activity for at least 6 months, with accompanying distress. Treatment follows a biopsychosocial model and is guided by history and assessment of symptoms. Sex therapy has been the standard treatment, although there is a paucity of studies assessing efficacy, except for mindfulness-based cognitive behavior therapy. Bupropion and buspirone may be considered off-label treatments for HSDD, despite limited safety and efficacy data. Menopausal women with HSDD may benefit from off-label testosterone treatment, as evidenced by multiple clinical trials reporting some efficacy and short-term safety. Currently, flibanserin is the only Food and Drug Administration-approved medication to treat premenopausal women with generalized acquired HSDD. Based on existing data, we hypothesize that all these therapies alter central inhibitory and excitatory pathways. In conclusion, HSDD significantly affects quality of life in women and can effectively be managed by health care providers with appropriate assessments and individualized treatments.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".