A feasibility study of cognitive-behavioural couple therapy for sexual interest/arousal disorder (HOLD study)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Helping with Outcomes for Low Desire (HOLD) study is a two-site feasibility study of a novel cognitive-behavioural couple therapy for sexual interest/arousal disorder (i.e., distressing low sexual desire and/or arousal that persists for 6 months or longer). Couples wherein one individual (woman or assigned female at birth) met DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for sexual interest/arousal disorder (American Psychiatric Association, 2013) were recruited from two large metropolitan Canadian cities. Nineteen couples participated in a 16-session manualized cognitive-behavioural couple therapy intervention with a therapist via Zoom and completed online surveys pre-treatment (T1), immediately post-treatment (T2), and 6 months post-treatment (T3). The aims of this study are to test the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of a novel manualized cognitive-behavioural couple therapy intervention for individuals with sexual interest/arousal disorder and their partners.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.037 | 0.013 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".