Is Persistent Genital Arousal Disorder a Subtype of Vulvodynia? Comparing Psychosocial Correlates in Women with Persistent Genital Arousal and Vulvodynia Symptoms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Persistent genital arousal disorder (PGAD) is characterized by symptoms of physiological sexual arousal (genital vasocongestion, sensitivity) that are described as unwanted, distressing, and sometimes painful. Following a review of both bodies of literature, Markos and Dinsmore (2013) suggested that PGAD shares many similarities with vulvodynia. This study sought to compare psychosocial functioning of women with symptoms of persistent genital arousal (PGA) and vulvodynia. Women with symptoms of PGA (N=43), painful PGA (N=53) and vulvodynia (N=49) were recruited from online support groups, listservs, social media, health care providers, and researchers. Participants completed an online survey on daily functioning, depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, relationship quality, and sexual functioning. There was no significant differences in depressive symptoms across all three groups (p > .05). However, there was an effect of group on anxiety symptoms, F(2, 135)= 6.82, p = .002. Women in the two PGA groups reported significantly greater anxiety symptoms than women in the vulvodynia group. The scores of women with PGA and painful PGA symptoms indicated significant difficulties on all domains of daily functioning, except basic activities of daily living, whereas women with vulvodynia reported significant difficulties with psychological and social functioning only. With regards to sexual functioning, women in the vulvodynia group reported significantly poorer sexual functioning than the two PGA groups. Interesting, there were no group differences in sexual distress or relationship satisfaction (p > .05).
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".