MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409810982 · doi:10.1093/jsxmed/qdaf068.018

(018) DIMENSIONAL NON-LINEAR ASSOCIATIONS BETWEEN PERSISTENT GENITAL AROUSAL SYMPTOMS, ASSOCIATED DISTRESS, AND SEXUAL FUNCTION IN FEMALES

2025· article· en· W4409810982 on OpenAlexaff
Jeff Kiesner, C Bittoni, Robyn A. Jackowich

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Sexual Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArousalDistressSex organSexual functionSexual arousalClinical psychologyPsychologyMedicineInternal medicineBiologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Persistent genital arousal/genito-pelvic dysesthesia (PGAD/GPD; henceforth “PGA”) has often been studied as a dichotomous variable, comparing symptomatic vs asymptomatic individuals (e.g., Jackowich, Poirier, & Pukall, 2020). Consequently, little is known about the associations between PGA symptoms and sexual function across a continuum of PGA symptom intensity. Objective The objectives are: (1) test for linear and non-linear associations between PGA symptoms and sexual desire; (2) test for linear and non-linear associations between PGA symptoms and other sexual function variables; and (3) distinguish between PGA symptoms and distress caused by those symptoms when predicting sexual function. Testing for non-linear associations is possible only by treating PGA symptoms as a continuum. Methods A sample of n = 1904 females (M = 30 years, SD = 9.7) completed an online survey on sexual function (Female Sexual Function Index, FSFI), genital pain (1 question), PGA symptoms (Jackowich & Pukall, 2020), and distress associated with PGA symptoms (Jackowich & Pukall, 2020). Analyses tested for linear and quadratic (curvilinear) associations between PGA symptoms and sexual function, and between distress caused by PGA symptoms and sexual function. Results The correlation between PGA symptoms and distress caused by those symptoms was r = .31 (p < .0001, no evidence of a curvilinear association), suggesting that these symptoms are only moderately associated with distress. Groups reporting (a) no genital pain, (b) vulvar pain, (c) vaginal pain, or (d) vulvar and vaginal pain differed in their levels of PGA symptoms (Fig. 1), with vaginal pain appearing to contribute little to the pain-related elevation in PGA symptoms. Analyses testing for linear and non-linear associations between PGA symptoms and FSFI sexual desire found a significant positive association and a negative quadratic (curvilinear) effect (Fig. 2), showing that as PGA symptoms increase so does desire, but that this association reverses at the high end of PGA symptoms. Finally, analyses testing for linear and non-linear associations between PGA symptoms and sexual function (total FSFI), and between distress caused by PGA symptoms and sexual function (total FSFI), showed no significant effects of PGA symptoms, but significant negative linear and curvilinear effects for distress caused by those symptoms (Fig. 3). Negative associations (either linear, curvilinear, or both) between distress and sexual function were observed for all FSFI subscales except the satisfaction subscale. Conclusions This is the first study to document an inverted-u shaped association between PGA symptoms and sexual desire. Moreover, whereas PGA symptoms themselves had a negligible effect on sexual function, distress caused by those symptoms had a consistent negative effect. Clinically, these results suggest that PGA symptoms are not universally a negative experience, and that emphasis should be placed on the consequent distress. However, the distinction between sexual function as defined by the FSFI, and distress about sexual function, may be especially relevant to those experiencing PGA symptoms. Finally, the finding that vulvar pain is associated with PGA symptoms, with vaginal pain contributing little to the increased levels of PGA symptoms, may provide insights to the neural underpinning for some people’s PGA symptoms (refer to Pukall, Jackowich, Mooney, Chamberlain, 2018, for related discussion). Disclosure Any of the authors act as a consultant, employee or shareholder of an industry for: Initiator Pharma; Pelva Health.

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.560

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Sexual MedicineSame topicSexual function and dysfunction studiesFrench-language works237,207