Sexual Communication, Dyadic Adjustment, and Psychosexual Well‐Being in Premenopausal Women with Self‐Reported Dyspareunia and Their Partners: A Controlled Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Although research that takes into account partner and relationship factors in dyspareunia is slowly emerging, little is known about how these couples communicate about their sexuality. Additionally, partner psychosexual adjustment has not been examined in a controlled fashion. AIM: This study aimed to compare dyadic sexual communication, dyadic adjustment, psychological adjustment, and sexual well-being of women with self-reported dyspareunia and their partners with those of pain-free control women and their partners. METHODS: Premenopausal women (n = 38; mean [M] age = 24.92) with self-reported dyspareunia, their partners (n = 38; M age = 26.71), as well as pain-free control women (n = 44; M age = 25.86) and their partners (n = 44; M age = 27.95) completed an online survey measuring dyadic sexual communication, dyadic adjustment, anxiety, depression, sexual functioning, and sexual distress. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Assessments of women and men's (i) dyadic sexual communication; (ii) dyadic adjustment; (iii) anxiety; (iv) depression; (v) sexual functioning; and (vi) women's sexual distress were the main outcome measures. RESULTS: Compared with pain-free controls, women with dyspareunia reported significantly poorer dyadic sexual communication, a difference not found between partners of women with dyspareunia and control partners. Compared with partners of control women, those of women with dyspareunia reported significantly more impaired sexual functioning. No differences in dyadic adjustment were found between women with dyspareunia and pain-free control women, or between their respective partners. Finally, compared with control women, those with dyspareunia reported significantly more impaired psychological and sexual well-being. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that dyspareunia impacts not only the psychosexual adjustment of affected women but also that of their partners. It seems relevant to include both members of the couple in future research and treatment for dyspareunia.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".