MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4207074886 · doi:10.1016/j.sxmr.2021.12.002

Should We Call It a Prostate? A Review of the Female Periurethral Glandular Tissue Morphology, Histochemistry, Nomenclature, and Role in Iatrogenic Sexual Dysfunction

2022· review· en· W4207074886 on OpenAlexaff
Diane Tomalty, Olivia Giovannetti, Johanna L. Hannan, Barry R. Komisaruk, S. Goldstein, Irwin Goldstein, Michael A. Adams

Bibliographic record

VenueSexual Medicine Reviews · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProstateOrgasmUrethraSexual dysfunctionMedicineEjaculationErectile dysfunctionImmunohistochemistryErectile tissuePathologyAnatomyUrologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: There is evidence of glandular tissue within the region of the anterior vaginal wall-female periurethral tissue (AVW-FPT) having similar morphology and immunohistochemistry to the prostate in men and having physiological roles in the female sexual response (FSR). Whether this tissue should be called a prostate in women has been debated. Iatrogenic injury to structures of the AVW-FPT, including these glands and the associated neurovasculature, could be a cause of female sexual dysfunction (FSD). OBJECTIVES: To consolidate the current knowledge concerning the glandular tissue surrounding the urethra in women, evidence was reviewed to address whether: (i) these glands comprise the prostate in women, (ii) they have specific functions in the FSR, and (iii) injury to the AVW-FPT and prostate has sexual dysfunction as a likely outcome. METHODS: A literature review was conducted using keywords including female prostate, Skene's/paraurethral glands, periurethral tissue, Gräfenberg (G)-spot, female ejaculation, mid-urethral sling (MUS), and sexual dysfunction. RESULTS: Histological and immunohistochemical studies of the glandular tissue surrounding the urethra support the existence of prostate in women. Evidence suggests this tissue may have physiologically and clinically relevant autonomic and sensory innervation, and during sexual arousal may contribute to secretions involved in ejaculation and orgasm. Gaps in knowledge relating to the functional anatomy, physiological roles, and embryological origins of this tissue have impeded the acceptance of a prostate in women. Injury to the innervation, vasculature, and/or glandular tissue within the surgical field of MUS implantation suggests iatrogenic sexual dysfunction is plausible. CONCLUSIONS: Continuing to advance our understanding of the morphology, histochemistry, and physiologic capacity of this glandular tissue will clarify the characterization of this tissue as the "prostate" involved in the FSR, and its role in FSD following surgical injury. Tomalty D, Giovannetti O, Hannan J, et al. Should We Call It a Prostate? A Review of the Female Periurethral Glandular Tissue Morphology, Histochemistry, Nomenclature, and Role in Iatrogenic Sexual Dysfunction. Sex Med Rev 2022;10:183-194.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0100.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.126
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSexual Medicine ReviewsSame topicSexual function and dysfunction studiesFrench-language works237,207