International Society for the Study of Women’s Sexual Health (ISSWSH) Review of Epidemiology and Pathophysiology, and a Consensus Nomenclature and Process of Care for the Management of Persistent Genital Arousal Disorder/Genito-Pelvic Dysesthesia (PGAD/GPD)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Persistent genital arousal disorder (PGAD), a condition of unwanted, unremitting sensations of genital arousal, is associated with a significant, negative psychosocial impact that may include emotional lability, catastrophization, and suicidal ideation. Despite being first reported in 2001, PGAD remains poorly understood. AIM: To characterize this complex condition more accurately, review the epidemiology and pathophysiology, and provide new nomenclature and guidance for evidence-based management. METHODS: A panel of experts reviewed pertinent literature, discussed research and clinical experience, and used a modified Delphi method to reach consensus concerning nomenclature, etiology, and associated factors. Levels of evidence and grades of recommendation were assigned for diagnosis and treatment. OUTCOMES: The nomenclature of PGAD was broadened to include genito-pelvic dysesthesia (GPD), and a new biopsychosocial diagnostic and treatment algorithm for PGAD/GPD was developed. RESULTS: The panel recognized that the term PGAD does not fully characterize the constellation of GPD symptoms experienced by patients. Therefore, the more inclusive term PGAD/GPD was adopted, which maintains the primacy of the distressing arousal symptoms and acknowledges associated bothersome GPD. While there are diverse biopsychosocial contributors, there is a common underlying neurologic basis attributable to spontaneous intense activity of the genito-pelvic region represented in the somatosensory cortex and its projections. A process of care diagnostic and treatment strategy was developed to guide the clinician, whenever possible, by localizing the symptoms as originating in any of five regions: (i) end organ, (ii) pelvis/perineum, (iii) cauda equina, (iv) spinal cord, and (v) brain. Psychological treatment strategies were considered critical and should be performed in conjunction with medical strategies. Pharmaceutical interventions may be used based on their site and mechanism of action to reduce patients' symptoms and the associated bother and distress. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The process of care for PGAD/GPD uses a personalized, biopsychosocial approach for diagnosis and treatment. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS: Strengths and Limitations: Strengths include characterization of the condition by consensus, analysis, and recommendation of a new nomenclature and a rational basis for diagnosis and treatment. Future investigations into etiology and treatment outcomes are recommended. The main limitations are the dearth of knowledge concerning this condition and that the current literature consists primarily of case reports and expert opinion. CONCLUSION: We provide, for the first time, an expert consensus review of the epidemiology and pathophysiology and the development of a new nomenclature and rational algorithm for management of this extremely distressing sexual health condition that may be more prevalent than previously recognized. Goldstein I, Komisaruk BR, Pukall CF, et al. International Society for the Study of Women's Sexual Health (ISSWSH) Review of Epidemiology and Pathophysiology, and a Consensus Nomenclature and Process of Care for the Management of Persistent Genital Arousal Disorder/Genito-Pelvic Dysesthesia (PGAD/GPD). J Sex Med 2021;18:665-697.
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 | 0.025 | 0.047 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.016 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.003 |
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".