Jennifer A. Bossio: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
WikiModEn2 (talk | contribs) →Critical commentary: Add year. |
WikiModEn2 (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 182: | Line 182: | ||
|accessdate=2024-12-15 | |accessdate=2024-12-15 | ||
}}</ref> This is an outlier position that is in conflict with several other studies. | }}</ref> This is an outlier position that is in conflict with several other studies. | ||
Brian D. Earp, Ph.D. (2016) has published a significant criticism of the work of Bossio et al.<ref>{{REFjournal | |||
|last=Earp | |||
|first= | |||
|init=BD | |||
|author-link= | |||
|etal=no | |||
|title=Circumcision and Sexual Function: Bad Science Reporting Misleads Parents | |||
|trans-title= | |||
|language= | |||
|journal=Journal of Medical Ethics | |||
|location= | |||
|date=2016-04-22 | |||
|season= | |||
|volume= | |||
|issue= | |||
|article= | |||
|page= | |||
|pages= | |||
|url=https://blogs.bmj.com/medical-ethics/2016/04/22/circumcision-and-sexual-function-bad-science-reporting-misleads-parents/ | |||
|archived= | |||
|quote= | |||
|pubmedID= | |||
|pubmedCID= | |||
|DOI= | |||
|doi= | |||
|accessdate=2024-12-16 | |||
}}</ref> | |||
{{SEEALSO}} | {{SEEALSO}} | ||
* [[Sexual effects of circumcision]] | * [[Sexual effects of circumcision]] | ||
Revision as of 17:22, 16 December 2024
Adjunct Assistant Professor Jennifer A. Bossio, M.S.[a 1], Ph.D.[a 2], C. Psych., is a Canadian psychologist at Queens University in the Department of Urology.[1]
Dr. Bossio also maintains a private practice.[2]
Bossio JA, Pukall CF, Steele S. A review of the current state of the male circumcision literature. J Sex Med. December 2014; 11(12): 2847-64. PMID. DOI. Retrieved 15 December 2024.- Bossio JA, Pukall CF, Bartley K. You either have it or you don’t: The impact of male circumcision status on sexual partners
. The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality. 2015; 24(2): 104–19. DOI. - Bossio JA, Pukall CF, Steele SS. Examining Penile Sensitivity in Neonatally Circumcised and Intact Men Using Qualitative Sensory Testing. J Urol. June 2016; 195(6): 1848-53. PMID. DOI. Retrieved 15 December 2024.
Quote:The foreskin of intact men was more sensitive to tactile stimulation than the other penile sites
- Bossio JA. Re: Examining Penile Sensitivity in Neonatally Circumcised and Intact Men Using Quantitative Sensory Testing . J Urol. 2016; 195: 1821-26. Retrieved 15 December 2024.
- Bossio JA, Pukall CF. Attitude Toward One's Circumcision Status Is More Important than Actual Circumcision Status for Men's Body Image and Sexual Functioning . Arch Sex Behav. April 2018; 47(3): 771-81. PMID. DOI. Retrieved 15 December 2024.
Critical commentary
Bossio et al. (2016) have argued that, "Penile sensitivity did not differ across circumcision status for any stimulus type or penile site."[3] This is an outlier position that is in conflict with several other studies.
Brian D. Earp, Ph.D. (2016) has published a significant criticism of the work of Bossio et al.[4]
See also
External links
Official website. Retrieved 15 December 2024
Abbreviations
- ↑
Master of Science
, Wikipedia. Retrieved 13 October 2021. (Latin: magisterii scientiae; also abbreviated MS, MSc, M.Sc., SM, S.M., ScM or Sc.M.) - ↑
Doctor of Philosophy
, Wikipedia. Retrieved 16 June 2021. (Also abbreviated as D.Phil.)
References
- ↑ Bossio, Jennifer (January 2023).
Curriculum Vitae
. Retrieved 16 December 2024. - ↑ Bossio, Jenn.
Meet Dr. Jenn Bossio, C.Psych
, Tri Health Clinic. Retrieved 15 December 2024. - ↑ Bossio JA, Pukall CF, Steele SS. Examining Penile Sensitivity in Neonatally Circumcised and Intact Men Using Qualitative Sensory Testing. J Urol. June 2016; 195(6): 1848-53. PMID. DOI. Retrieved 15 December 2024.
Quote:The foreskin of intact men was more sensitive to tactile stimulation than the other penile sites
- ↑ Earp BD. Circumcision and Sexual Function: Bad Science Reporting Misleads Parents. Journal of Medical Ethics. 22 April 2016; Retrieved 16 December 2024.