Sexual wellbeing in vulvodynia: A narrative review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vulvodynia, defined as idiopathic chronic vulvar pain, is a prevalent and distressing condition that entails significant impacts on many aspects of psychosocial wellbeing. Given the location of the pain in vulvodynia and the unique sexual challenges faced by individuals with this condition, the purpose of the present paper was to narratively review the literature on sexual wellbeing in vulvodynia. In the face of evolving definitions of sexual wellbeing, we examined the following aspects: sexual function, pain during sexual activity, sexual satisfaction, sexual pleasure, and genital self-image. Secondary aims were to examine the frequency with which these aspects are studied, to report on premenopausal or postmenopausal status of the samples, and to describe the subtypes of vulvodynia featured in the literature. A search for articles in Medline, PsycINFO, and Web of Science examining these aspects in the last 10 years yielded 54 studies for inclusion and extraction. Results indicated that sexual function, pain during sexual activity, and sexual satisfaction are the most common aspects of sexual wellbeing studied in the vulvodynia literature. Sexual pleasure and genital self-image, however, are not frequently assessed in vulvodynia studies. In addition, the vulvodynia literature focused predominantly on premenopausal samples with provoked pain. Numerous psychosocial factors were found to be associated with sexual wellbeing outcomes, including intrapersonal and interpersonal aspects. These factors should be considered as intervention targets in the management of vulvodynia, given the widespread effects of this condition.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".