Clinical Features Associated with Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting: A Pilot Longitudinal Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
(1) Background: Female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C) is associated with physical and psychological complications. However, there is scarce literature on how women with FGM/C respond to treatment interventions. (2) Methods: In the present pilot longitudinal study, we assessed changes in general psychopathology (Symptom Check List-90-R), sexual functioning and distress (Female Sexual Function Index, Female Sexual Distress Scale-Revised, and Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) female sexual dysfunction criteria), body image (Body Shape Questionnaire), and sexual body image (Female Genital Self-Image Scale) in a sample of n = 15 women with FGM/C before and after reconstructive surgery. (3) Results: Sexual distress was significantly improved following surgery. We also observed an improvement in general psychopathology and genital self-image. However, sexual function was not improved. (4) Conclusions: These results provide evidence for the benefits of reconstructive surgery on sexual distress in women with FGM/C. The impact of surgery on sexual function cannot be conclusively evaluated.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".