MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415985143 · doi:10.1080/17446651.2025.2585855

Management of sexual dysfunction in menopause: an update on evidence-based strategies

2025· review· en· W4415985143 on OpenAlexaff
Giorgia E. Parrotta, Laura Cucinella, Rossella E. Nappi

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Endocrinology & Metabolism · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity Hospital Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSexual dysfunctionPsychological interventionHealth careReproductive healthFemale sexual dysfunctionMenopause

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Female sexual dysfunction (FSD) at menopause is a group of prevalent and multifactorial conditions that significantly impair quality of life and well-being. Hormonal decline, particularly estrogen and androgen deprivation, along with aging-related changes, contribute to genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM) and hypoactive sexual desire disorder (HSDD), the two most relevant clinical entities. AREAS COVERED: This narrative review provides an updated revision of the literature regarding evidence-based strategies for FSD in menopausal women. Emphasis is placed on pharmacologic treatments, including systemic and local hormonal and non-hormonal therapies, selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERM), and centrally acting agents. Non-pharmacological interventions are also discussed, such as pelvic floor rehabilitation, laser therapies, and psychosexual approaches (cognitive behavioral therapy, mindfulness, couple therapy). The content draws mainly on recent clinical trials, consensus statements, and guideline-based recommendations, based on Pubmed search updated to July 2025. EXPERT OPINION: Management of FSD associated with menopause requires a multidimensional, individualized approach integrating biological, psychological, and relational factors. A proactive and structured clinical framework, supported by validated diagnostic tools, is essential. Healthcare providers (HCPs) should address sexual health openly, recognize the couple's dynamics, and tailor interventions to each woman's needs and preferences, while considering the evolving evidence and regulatory landscape.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.339 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of Endocrinology & MetabolismSame topicSexual function and dysfunction studiesFrench-language works237,207