The treatment of trauma-induced sexual pain among women: Clinical considerations for the use of adjunctive EMDR
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Almost half of all women experience a sexual pain disorder in their lifetime, including dyspareunia, vaginismus, vulvodynia, and provoked vestibulodynia. Despite significant negative consequences across quality of life indices, few women seek treatment for sexual pain, and among those who do access support, more than half report that currently available strategies are ineffective or even harmful in some cases. This outcome may partly result from a standard of care that prioritizes pharmacotherapy and/or physiotherapy within pain management protocols rather than psychological interventions despite their demonstrated ability to yield comparatively better treatment outcomes. In considering that some women experience sexual pain in the aftermath of a sexually traumatic event, Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR), a type of evidence-based trauma therapy, may be a suitable adjunctive treatment to mitigate symptoms by targeting psychological risk factors. In this report, the authors first review the impact of sexual trauma on sexual pain, particularly the biopsychosocial effects of trauma within the body and its hypothesized mechanisms of action on sexual functioning, and then provide an overview of EMDR therapy, including how it promotes the resolution of trauma symptoms and its effects on sexual pain. By presenting this evidence, the authors will explore how EMDR therapy may have utility as a novel adjunctive treatment to address sexual trauma-induced sexual pain disorders and optimize the provision of care among this clinical population.
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 | 0.004 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".