Feasibility of a cognitive behavioral online intervention for women with Sexual Interest/Arousal Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Difficulties with sexual desire and arousal are common in women, but most lack access to effective treatment such as cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT). eSense is a recently created online CBT intervention for sexual difficulties with promising evidence of usability. The current study assessed the feasibility of women completing the full eSense CBT program without guidance. METHODS: Eleven women with Sexual Interest/Arousal Disorder completed eSense and provided feedback via semi-structured interviews. RESULTS: Participants reported high satisfaction with eSense's functionality, improved knowledge about sexuality, greater awareness of their thought patterns, and better perspective around their sexual difficulties. Despite some difficulty completing homework, participants exhibited statistically significant pre-post improvements in sexual desire (d = 1.04), sexual arousal (d = 1.83), sexual satisfaction (d = 1.35), and sexual distress (d = 1.79). CONCLUSION: The findings add to the growing evidence that self-guided online interventions are feasible and potentially efficacious in treating female sexual dysfunction.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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".