COMPARISON OF CHRONIC TESTICULAR PAIN AND SCROTAL PAIN DUE TO VARICOCELE USING THE JAPANESE SHORT FORM McGill PAIN QUESTIONNAIRE (SF-MPQ)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chronic testicular pain (CTP) is testicular pain that persists for more than 3 months, and the cause of the pain is often unknown, sometimes requiring differentiation from varicocele (VC). In this study, the shortform McGill pain questionnaire (SF-MPQ), which allows a detailed assessment of pain, was used to examine the clinical differences between CTP and scrotal pain due to VC. A retrospective study (IRB#: TeiRin21-036) was conducted on 7 7 patients who visited our clinic between 2018 and 2022 with the chief complaint of scrotal pain. Of the 77 patients, 19 were diagnosed with CTP and 58 patients with VC. All patients were evaluated for marital status, smoking, alcohol consumption, body mass index, and duration of pain. In addition, comorbidities were assessed using the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). All patients were asked to complete the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS), Verbal Rating Scale (VRS), and SF-MPQ With respect to the patient background, the CTP group was significantly older than the VC group, had a higher percentage of married patients, and had higher CCI. Concerning pain assessment, the CTP group had significantly higher NRS and VRS than the VC group. In terms of pain sensation and character, the CTP group experienced significantly more throbbing, shooting, stabbing, sharp, burning, and tender pain than the VC group. Regarding, the emotional aspects of pain, they significantly felt the pain tiring- exhausting, sickening, fearful, and punishing-cruel. These results suggest that the SF-MPQ may be a useful questionnaire in the evaluation of CTP.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".