MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3047690671 · doi:10.1007/s11930-020-00268-2

Persistent Genital Arousal Disorder: a Biopsychosocial Framework

2020· article· en· W3047690671 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

VenueCurrent Sexual Health Reports · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiopsychosocial modelPsychosocialDysesthesiaPsychologyClinical psychologyPopulationSexual arousalSexual desireArousalMedicinePsychotherapistHuman sexualitySexual behavior

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Purpose of Review Persistent genital arousal disorder (also referred to as genitopelvic dysesthesia or PGAD/GD) is a distressing and largely underrecognized condition characterized by persistent, unwanted genital arousal (sensations, sensitivity, vasocongestion) in the absence of subjective/cognitive arousal and sexual desire. The purpose of this review is to summarize recent findings on biological and psychosocial factors in PGAD/GD as they pertain to the assessment and treatment of this condition. These findings will be considered within a biopsychosocial framework, for the purposes of considering next steps for clinical and research efforts. Recent Findings A small number of studies have recently examined potential biological aetiologies for PGAD/GD: pharmacological agents, spinal pathology and peripheral nerve involvement. Recent studies have also found that PGAD/GD is associated with a significant negative impact on psychosocial wellbeing and daily functioning as compared to symptom-free individuals. In addition, these results highlight cognitive/affective responses to symptoms (e.g. catastrophizing of symptoms) that may influence outcomes. However, biological and psychological research are rarely integrated in these studies, despite the interrelationship between these factors. Summary Although PGAD/GD was first described in the scientific literature almost two decades ago, most research on PGAD/GD is presented in the form of case studies. Prospective treatment trials that integrate biopsychosocial factors are needed in order to provide effective and efficient care to this population. This research would be facilitated by the development of a patient-reported outcome measure, as well as greater education/awareness among healthcare providers and the public about this distressing condition.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.727
Threshold uncertainty score0.924

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.271 · 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