MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4317927826 · doi:10.2196/39834

Ohnut Versus a Waitlist Control for the Self-management of Endometriosis-Associated Deep Dyspareunia: Protocol for a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

2023· article· en· W4317927826 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Sandy Zhang, Rebecca G K MacLeod, Gurkiran Parmar, Natasha L. Orr, Kate Wahl, Heather Noga, Arianne Albert, Ryan Flannigan, Lori A. Brotto, Paul J. Yong

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEndometriosis Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsWomen's Health Research InstituteUniversity of British Columbia
FundersUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialMedicineSexual functionPhysical therapyAnxietyQuality of life (healthcare)SurgeryPsychiatryInternal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Endometriosis-associated deep dyspareunia is associated with reduced sexual quality of life, lower self-esteem, and impaired sexual function. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective is to assess the acceptability of a phallus length reducer (brand name: Ohnut [OhnutCo]), which is a buffer worn over the penis or a penetrating object to reduce endometriosis-associated deep dyspareunia, and the feasibility of a definitive randomized controlled trial (RCT). The secondary objective is to obtain estimates of the effectiveness of the buffer. An embedded substudy will explore the acceptability and the preliminary validity and reliability of a vaginal insert for the self-assessment of deep dyspareunia. METHODS: Ours is an investigator-initiated, 2-arm RCT. We will recruit 40 patient participants with diagnosed endometriosis between the ages of 19 and 49 years, as well as their sexual partners. The participating couples will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio into the experimental arm or the waitlist control arm. The length of the study period will be 10 weeks, during which time all participants will record deep dyspareunia severity following each episode of sexual intercourse. In weeks 1 to 4, all patient participants will record deep dyspareunia severity at each sexual encounter. In weeks 5 to 10, participants in the experimental arm will use the buffer during vaginal penetration; participants in the waitlist control arm will continue engaging in vaginal penetration as usual. Participants will complete questionnaires for assessing measures of anxiety, depression, and sexual function at baseline, at 4 weeks, and at 10 weeks. In the substudy, patient participants will self-assess dyspareunia by using a vaginal insert on 2 occasions, at least 1 week apart. The primary outcomes-the acceptability and feasibility of the buffer-will be assessed with descriptive statistics, and the secondary outcome-phallus length reducer effectiveness-will be assessed by using an analysis of covariance-based approach. For the vaginal insert, we will assess acceptability, test-retest reliability, and convergent validity via correlation analyses comparing the use of the insert to clinical examination in terms of dyspareunia assessment outcomes. RESULTS: Our pilot will provide initial data on the acceptability and effectiveness of the buffer and the feasibility of the study methodology. The results from our study are expected to be submitted for publication by the spring of 2023. As of September 2021, we have consented 31 couples into the study. CONCLUSIONS: Our study will provide preliminary evidence for the self-assessment and management of endometriosis-associated deep dyspareunia. The findings will inform the decision to proceed to a definitive RCT. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04370444; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04370444. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/39834.

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)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.282

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.006
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0070.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0840.012

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 head0.206
GPT teacher head0.529
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicEndometriosis Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207