The Vulvar Pain Assessment Questionnaire: Factor Structure, Preliminary Norms, Internal Consistency, and Test-Retest Reliability
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
BACKGROUND: The Vulvar Pain Assessment Questionnaire (VPAQ) was developed to assist in the assessment and diagnosis of chronic vulvar pain (vulvodynia). AIM: To further establish the psychometric properties of the VPAQ by examining factor structure, test-retest reliability, internal consistency, and scale normative data, and to gather feedback from those with vulvar pain about the usefulness and accessibility of the questionnaire. METHODS: 182 participants completed a confidential online study and 70 participated again at time 2 (4 weeks later). OUTCOMES: Participants were asked to complete the full VPAQ, which assesses pain characteristics, effects on various parts of their lives, coping strategies used, and romantic partner factors. Additional questions captured sociodemographics and feedback about the instrument. RESULTS: Exploratory structural equation modeling indicated that the previously established subscales, except the coping scale, had adequate model fit, and all items loaded significantly onto relevant factors. Pearson product moment correlations (r = 0.57-0.96) established strong 4-week test-retest reliability for most subscale scores, and Cronbach α indicated overall acceptable to high internal consistency (α = 0.56-0.95). Preliminary norms for the scales are supplied. Approximately half the participants reported an increase in their comfort level in discussing a range of topics after completing the VPAQ. Most participants reported that the length, readability, and range of VPAQ questions were "good" or "excellent." CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The results of this study provide further justification for using the VPAQ scales in clinical and research settings, preliminary norms for a vulvar pain population, and suggestions for interpretation. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS: This study established the psychometric properties of the VPAQ scales using multiple methods at 2 time points and gathered feedback from participants. However, data were collected online so diagnoses could not be confirmed and more than half the initial sample did not complete the survey at time 2. CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that most VPAQ subscales (except the coping subscale) have moderate to strong psychometric properties and that the VPAQ is user friendly. Dargie E, Holden RR, Pukall CF. The Vulvar Pain Assessment Questionnaire: Factor Structure, Preliminary Norms, Internal Consistency, and Test-Retest Reliability. J Sex Med 2017;14:1585-1596.
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 | 0.003 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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 it