Pharmacological Treatment for Pedophilic Disorder and Compulsive Sexual Behavior Disorder: A Review
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of paraphilic disorders have historically been based on data from forensic settings and on risk levels for sexual crime. However, emerging treatment options are being evaluated for individuals experiencing distress because of their sexual urges and preferences, targeting both paraphilic disorders such as pedophilic disorder (PeD) and the new diagnosis of compulsive sexual behavior disorder (CSBD) included in the International Classification of Diseases, 11th Revision (ICD-11). As in other mental disorders, this may enable individualized pharmacological treatment plans, taking into account components of sexuality (e.g. high libido, compulsivity, anxiety-driven/sex as coping), medical and psychiatric comorbidity, adverse effects and patient preferences. In order to expand on previous reviews, we conducted a literature search focusing on randomized controlled trials of pharmacological treatment for persons likely to have PeD or CSBD. Our search was not restricted to studies involving forensic or criminal samples. Twelve studies conducted between 1974 and 2021 were identified regardless of setting (outpatient or inpatient), with only one study conducted during the last decade. Of a total of 213 participants included in these studies, 122 (57%) were likely to have PeD, 34 (16%) were likely to have a CSBD, and the remainder had unspecified paraphilias (40, 21%) or sexual offense (17, 8%) as the treatment indication. The diagnostic procedure for PeD and/or CSBD, as well as comorbid psychiatric symptoms, has been described in seven studies. The studies provide some empirical evidence that testosterone-lowering drugs reduce sexual activity for patients with PeD or CSBD, but the body of evidence is meager. There is a need for studies using larger samples, specific criteria for inclusion, longer follow-up periods, and standardized outcome measures with adherence to international reporting guidelines.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 it