Self-esteem, defense mechanisms, sexual satisfaction and stress coping mechanisms in individuals treated for vaginismus: A controlled study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of study was to analyze the extent to which treatment for vaginismus affect self-esteem, defense mechanisms, sexual satisfaction and coping with stress. Was conducted as aquasi-experimental, cross-sectional study. The population of the study consisted of womenwho were followed up with the diagnosis of vaginismus in obstetrics clinic. As data collection tools, "Personal Information Form", "Coopersmith Self-Esteem Inventory", "Sexual Satisfaction Scale", "Coping Response Inventory" and "Defense Style Questionnaire" wereused. When people who were diagnosed with vaginismus and accepted treatment were asked about the reasons for demanding treatment, 11.4% of them responded that they experienced pain during sexual intercourse, 4.7% stated that they wanted to able to continue their marriage, and 2.8% of them stated that they wanted to gain self-confidence. When asked for whom they wanted the treatment of the disease, 61 of the participants responded, and 14 of them answered for "Me and my spouse" while 29 for "My spouse" and 18 for "Myself". It was revealed that self-esteem, defense mechanisms, sexual satisfaction and coping with stress are important factors in initiation, maintenance and completion of treatment in patients and that these factors should be especially emphasized during the treatment process.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".