The Roko Syndrome: A Mirror of Koro Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is well established that 1 in 50 individuals receives a diagnosis of body dysmorphic disorder (BDD). Within body image disorders, there is genital retraction syndrome also known as Koro. A unique syndrome in which there is a heightened belief that one’s genitals will diminish in size, retract into the abdomen and ultimately lead to death. However, we have recently discovered a separate form of BDD that is directly opposite of Koro, in which the patient presents a strong belief that his penis will enlarge and extend out of their body. We present a unique case report of a counter-Koro syndrome. This syndrome is characterized by the delusion that one’s penis is growing larger and that it will result in its extreme protrusion from the abdomen and a consequent fear of recurring and visible erections. Given its mirror-like presentation and uniqueness to occurring only in males, we refer to it as Roko Syndrome. To our knowledge, this syndrome has not yet been reported in the literature and requires further study to understand whether it fits as a separate syndrome or falls along the spectrum of body dysmorphia. Thus, assessments used to identify body image disorders can be broadened to include items representing the behavior and presentation of Roko that we delineate in comparison of Koro. The new syndrome is also easily distinguishable from a priapism which is a urological emergency.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".