MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Psychosocial Factors in Painful Urogenital Conditions in Men

2012· book-chapter· en· W52252797 on OpenAlexaff
Dean A. Tripp, Jessica Ginting

Bibliographic record

VenueHumana Press eBooks · 2012
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrinary Bladder and Prostate Research
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiopsychosocial modelPsychosocialProstatitisMedicineChronic painClinical psychologyCoping (psychology)AnxietyInterpersonal communicationPsychologyPsychiatryPsychotherapistCancerProstateInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pain is the most common reason for seeking attention in medical settings. For primary care providers and urologists alike, managing pain-associated medical conditions that are refractory to conventional treatment methods is challenging. Chronic urogenital pain that is refractory to conventional treatments (i.e., antibiotics) is common among men but not recognized widely in the medical community. Without a cure for refractory urogenital pain conditions, pain “management” must be a key word in developing patient care maps. In such cases, the biopsychosocial perspective is necessitated because whenever pain becomes chronic, a syndrome that features depression, anxiety, insomnia, helplessness, and disability is a real possibility. This chapter focused on the internationally prevalent male urogenital pain syndrome of chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) as well as prostate cancer. From a biopsychosocial perspective, this chapter examined pain and a biomedical model of treatment. The chapter then examined several psychosocial variables associated with poor patient outcomes in men with CP/CPPS (e.g., pain or quality of life). These data also offer clinical insights into the psychosocial management of urogenital pain conditions. Particular attention is provided for social support in this chapter. Recent data from men suffering with CP/CPPS shows that men report differences in their coping, cognitive appraisals, and self-perceived social support. Thus, interpersonal factors such as internalized cognitive appraisals of one’s ability to self-manage urogenital pain are given special attention. This chapter closes with an extension of the current discussion to the literature on prostate cancer highlighting interpersonal factors and psychosocial treatments. General concluding remarks suggest that patient care maps for men be expanded to consider social factors as well as the strong cognitive factors that may underlie the development of poor support in couples.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHumana Press eBooksSame topicUrinary Bladder and Prostate ResearchFrench-language works237,207