MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Summary of the Recommendations on Sexual Dysfunctions in Women

2004· article· en· W4255989875 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Sexual Medicine · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSexual medicineVaginismusOrgasmSexual dysfunctionGuidelineFemale sexual dysfunctionPsychologyPsychosocialSexual desireHuman sexualityMedicineSexual arousalClinical psychologyPsychiatryGynecologyFamily medicineSexual behaviorPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Women's sexual dysfunctions include persistent or recurrent disorders of sexual interest/desire, disorders of subjective and genital arousal, orgasm disorder, pain and difficulty with attempted or completed intercourse. There are limited recommendation/guideline documents pertaining to the diagnosis and treatment of women's sexual dysfunctions. AIM: To provide recommendations/guidelines concerning state-of-the-art knowledge for the clinical management of women's sexual dysfunctions. METHODS: An International Consultation in collaboration with the major sexual medicine associations assembled over 200 multidisciplinary experts from 60 countries into 17 committees. Committee members established specific objectives and scopes for various sexual medicine topics. The recommendations concerning state-of-the-art knowledge in the respective sexual medicine topic represent the opinion of experts from five continents developed in a process over a 2-year period. Ten experts from four countries compiled the Recommendations on Sexual Dysfunctions in Women. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Expert opinion was based on grading of evidence-based medical literature, widespread internal committee discussion, public presentation and debate. RESULTS: Recommendations and guidelines concerning the various sexual dysfunctions were updated. A comprehensive assessment of medical, sexual and psychosocial history is recommended for diagnosis and management planning. Indications for general and focused pelvic genital examination and laboratory testing are included. Recently revised definitions for sexual desire/interest disorder, arousal disorders (genital, subjective, combined and persistent), orgasm disorder, dyspareunia and vaginismus are presented. An evidence-based approach to management is provided. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need for more research and scientific reporting, re-assessment, and management of women's sexual dysfunction including long-term outcome studies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.264
Threshold uncertainty score0.304

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.268 · 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