Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Provoked vestibulodynia (PVD) is an idiopathic vulvar pain condition characterized by burning pain at the vaginal opening in response to contact or pressure. Previous research has established some of the psychosocial difficulties experienced by these patients, but direct comparisons with other pain conditions are needed. The purpose of this study was to compare women with PVD to those with postherpetic neuralgia and pain-free control participants. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Participants were invited to complete an anonymous online survey consisting of sociodemographic questions and a range of validated measures. RESULTS: Women with PVD and postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) did not differ in terms of pain catastrophizing or pain anxiety, but women with PHN reported greater pain disability than those with PVD. Participants in both pain groups reported significantly more symptoms of stress, depression, anxiety, and sleep disturbances than pain-free controls; women with PHN reported more symptoms of depression than those with PVD, with no other differences between pain groups. Groups did not differ on relationship adjustment, but participants with PVD reported poorer sexual functioning than the other groups. DISCUSSION: These results indicate that women with PVD and PHN experience similar mental health difficulties, but women with PHN experience more severe impact on their day-to-day functioning and mood. These results support the classification of PVD as a chronic pain condition, as both the pain groups differed from pain-free control participants on a range of measures. Finally, the presence of mental health difficulties and poorer sexual functioning highlights the importance of conducting biopsychosocial pain assessments.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".