It’s not all that bad: associations among pain characteristics and sexual well-being in people living with chronic pain
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Individuals experiencing chronic pain often report adverse effects on their sexual functioning. However, other important aspects of sexual well-being (SWB), such as sexual distress and sexual self-esteem, have received little attention. This is an important omission because a SWB involves more than just good sexual function. Similarly, past research has not examined how chronic pain characteristics affect the different aspects of SWB. AIM: The goal of this cross-sectional study was to examine the SWB of individuals living with chronic pain and to examine the extent to which SWB is associated with different chronic pain characteristics. METHODS: A total of 310 individuals (28.1% men, 70.6% women, 1.3% transgender men) with ages between 21 and 50 (M = 31.96, SD = 6.13) who were in a romantic relationship and with self-reported chronic pain for three months or longer completed an online survey. OUTCOMES: The following indicators of SWB were included in the study: frequency of genital sexual activity, sexual satisfaction, sexual self-esteem, sexual desire, sexual function, genital pain, and sexual distress. RESULTS: The results show that most individuals with chronic pain maintain an active and satisfying sexual life and feel positive about themselves as a sexual partner. Slightly more than a fourth reported experiencing at least one sexual functioning difficulty and almost three-fourths of them found those difficulties sexually distressing. A first canonical correlation showed that more negative pain characteristics were associated with poorer SWB. The second canonical correlation showed that greater perceived partner support can offset the negative relationship between pain and some aspects of SWB. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: These findings show that individuals living with chronic pain can experience positive SWB. Furthermore, the buffering effect of partner support suggests it is important to involve romantic partners in interventions aimed at improving the SWB of people living with chronic pain. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS: The study examined a large number of indicators of SWB using a sample of individuals with different types of chronic pain. Limitations include potential self-selection bias and a sample that was predominantly white and highly educated. CONCLUSIONS: The results paint a more positive picture of the SWB of individuals living with pain and show that individuals living with chronic pain can experience positive SWB. These findings can help for researchers, educators, and clinicians about how to conceptualize, understand, and improve the SWB of individuals living with chronic pain.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,007 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».