MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1540284247 · doi:10.1111/jsm.12463

To Say or not to Say: Dyadic Ambivalence over Emotional Expression and Its Associations with Pain, Sexuality, and Distress in Couples Coping with Provoked Vestibulodynia

2014· article· en· W1540284247 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nayla Awada, Sophie Bergeron, Marc Steben, Victoria‐Ann Hainault, Pierre McDuff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Sexual Medicine · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de Santé Publique du QuébecUniversité de MontréalQuébec Science (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyBeck Depression InventoryClinical psychologyDistressSomatizationCoping (psychology)AmbivalenceHuman sexualitySexual functionAnxietyDevelopmental psychologyPsychiatrySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Provoked vestibulodynia (PVD) is a highly prevalent and taxing female genital pain condition. Despite the intimate nature of this pain and the fact that affective factors such as anxiety have been shown to modulate its manifestations, no study has yet explored the emotional regulation of couples in which the woman suffers from PVD. AIM: Ambivalence over emotional expression (AEE) is an emotional regulation variable that quantifies the extent to which a person is comfortable with the way she or he expresses emotions. We examined whether the dyadic AEE of couples in which the woman suffers from PVD was differentially associated with women's pain and couples' psychological, sexual, and relational functioning. METHODS: Couples (N = 254), in which the woman suffered from PVD, completed the AEE questionnaire. A couple typology of dyadic AEE was created. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Dependent measures for both members of the couple were the global measure of sexual satisfaction scale, the Beck depression inventory II, and the revised dyadic adjustment scale. The female sexual function index and the sexual history form were used to assess the sexual function of women and men, respectively. Women also completed the pain rating index of the McGill pain questionnaire. RESULTS: Couples, in which both partners were considered low on AEE, had the highest scores on sexual satisfaction (P = 0.02) and function (P < 0.01), the lowest depression scores (P < 0.01), and the best dyadic adjustment (P = 0.02). No difference in pain intensity was found between couples. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that, for couples in which the woman suffers from PVD, an emotional regulation that is low in ambivalence in both partners is associated with better psychological, sexual, and relational outcomes. Results indicate that emotional regulation may be important to consider in the assessment and treatment of couples coping with PVD.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations42
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Sexual MedicineSame topicSexual function and dysfunction studiesFrench-language works237,207