MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416775316 · doi:10.28931/riiad.2025.373

Producción científica sobre adicción a la pornografía: revisión bibliométrica de los últimos 30 años

2025· article· es· W4416775316 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shilia Lisset Vargas Echeverría, Roberto Carlos Pech Argüelles

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Internacional de Investigación en Adicciones · 2025
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldPsychology
TopicSexuality, Behavior, and Technology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThematic analysisPornographyAddictionInclusion (mineral)BibliometricsLatin AmericansThe InternetScientific literature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: this study analyzes scientific production on pornography addiction over the past 30 years, reflecting its growing academic and clinical relevance. Objective: to identify research patterns, key authors, and international collaborations on pornography addiction. Method: a bibliometric analysis was conducted using Web of Science, Scopus, and Dimensions. A total of 351 articles published between 1994 and 2024 were selected based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. Results: India, Canada, and the United Kingdom lead scientific production and J.B. Grubbs emerged as the most prolific author. Four thematic clusters were identified: clinical diagnosis, psychological factors, neuroscience, and clinical trials. Discussion and conclusions: the findings reflect significant publication growth since 2015, underscoring the increasing interest in pornography addiction as a public health issue. Further research is needed in underrepresented regions like Latin America and Africa.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmaBibliometrics
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptBibliometrics
Domain: not available · Genre: Review
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Other designhigh
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.795
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.332 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

Bibliometrics

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designObservational · Other design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical · Review

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 venueRevista Internacional de Investigación en AdiccionesSame topicSexuality, Behavior, and TechnologyCategoryBibliometricsFrench-language works237,207