MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3047952954 · doi:10.1016/j.esxm.2020.07.001

Vulvodynia Viewed From a Disease Prevention Framework: Insights From Patient Perspectives

2020· article· en· W3047952954 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

VenueSexual Medicine · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsSt. John’s Health Sciences CentreCommunity Sector Council Newfoundland and LabradorNewfoundland and Labrador Centre for Applied Health ResearchMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo
KeywordsVulvodyniaDistressContext (archaeology)MedicineReferralHealth careQualitative researchReproductive healthFocus groupNursingPsychologyFamily medicineClinical psychologyPopulationSurgeryPelvic pain

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Persons with vulvodynia (a chronic vulvar pain condition) suffer many barriers to diagnosis and treatment, several of which may be exacerbated by the sociocultural and geographical context in which they live. AIM: We drew on the experiences of patients with vulvodynia who were living in small urban and rural communities to learn what they perceived as the major barriers to diagnosis and treatment as well as to probe for possible solutions. METHODS: For this qualitative case study, we conducted 3 focus groups with a total of 10 participants, drawn from patients seen at our academic tertiary referral center, with a goal of understanding their lived experience with vulvodynia. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The patient dialogue was coded into themes and temporally grouped to illustrate struggles and victories in diagnosis and treatment. RESULTS: Participants confirmed that healthcare provider knowledge and attitudes as well as system challenges (specialist and allied healthcare provider availability) are major barriers to timely diagnosis. Of novel interest are other factors that exacerbate distress and delay diagnosis such as patients' inadequate knowledge of sexual functioning and sociocultural messages regarding "normal" sexual activity. Our work suggests that a disease prevention framework that includes comprehensive sexual education before or at the onset of sexual activity may be of benefit in reducing the burden of vulvodynia when added to strategies to increase healthcare provider knowledge and improve access to effective treatments. CONCLUSION: While healthcare provider knowledge and attitudes are often at the forefront of barriers to diagnosis, our study suggests that to minimize patient distress and expedite diagnosis, resources must also be directed to promoting comprehensive sexual health education. Webber V, Miller ME, Gustafson DL, et al. Vulvodynia Viewed From a Disease Prevention Framework: Insights From Patient Perspectives. Sex Med 2020;8:757-766.

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)0.002
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.308
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.261 · 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