Evaluation of selective-serotonin reuptake inhibitors and anti-androgens to manage sexual compulsivity in individuals serving a custodial sentence for a sexual offence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The UK prison system offers a medical treatment pathway for people suffering from problematic sexual arousal (PSA) who have committed a sexual offence(s). The two main medications are Anti-androgens (AAs) and Selective-Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors (SSRIs). Currently, evidence of the effectiveness of SSRIs is not sufficiently robust for them to be licensed in the UK for that purpose. Instead, SSRIs are prescribed ‘off-label’, and physicians must adhere to additional obligations in prescribing them. Yet SSRIs have fewer side effects than AAs and may be a better treatment option for many patients. The present study examined the effectiveness of AAs and SSRIs in incarcerated individuals with PSA (n = 77); the unmedicated comparison group (n = 58) resided at the same prison which houses people convicted of a sexual offence. Both medicated groups demonstrated reduced levels of PSA 3 months post-baseline; the comparison group did not. The findings provide evidence for the effectiveness of SSRIs in reducing PSA. The authors argue a randomised control trial is required to underpin the use of SSRIs in treating PSA and (potentially) its subsequent licensing. The latter would enable wider prescription in prison and community and make a substantive contribution to the prevention of sexual abuse.
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 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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".