MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

New Clinical and Research Perspectives on the Sexual Pain Disorders

2000· article· en· W2750643416 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sex Education and Therapy · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVaginismusPsychosocialPain syndromeSexual dysfunctionMedicineVulvodyniaPerspective (graphical)Clinical psychologyPsychologyPelvic painPhysical therapyPsychiatrySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A woman became unable to achieve penetration after repeated painful intercourse. This case illustrates the shortcomings of the present nomenclature and diagnostic criteria for the sexual pain disorders, dyspareunia and vaginismus. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition, considers the sexual pain disorders as sexual dysfunctions, completely ignoring the pain component and leading to internally inconsistent descriptions of these conditions. The role of pain in dyspareunia and vaginismus and the implications of using a pain syndrome framework for diagnosis and research are discussed. Most important, pain syndrome framework focuses diagnosis on the presence or absence of pain and the history of the development of the pain. This approach does not deny a role for psychosocial factors, but rather considers them as critical components of the pain syndromes. From the pain syndrome perspective, preliminary data indicate that vulvar vestibulitis syndrome may be associated with nonpainful sensory abnormalities, and that women with vaginismus do not constitute a homogeneous group.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.886
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.109
GPT teacher head0.447
Teacher spread0.338 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it