Relationship satisfaction moderates the associations between male partner responses and depression in women with vulvodynia: A dyadic daily experience study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vulvodynia is a prevalent vulvovaginal pain condition that interferes with women's psychological health. Given the central role of sexuality and relationships in vulvodynia, relationship satisfaction may be an important moderator of daily partner responses to this pain and associated negative sequelae, such as depression. Sixty-nine women (M age=28.12 years, SD=6.68) with vulvodynia and their cohabiting partners (M age=29.67 years, SD=8.10) reported their daily relationship satisfaction, and male partner responses on sexual intercourse days (M=3.74, SD=2.47) over 8 weeks. Women also reported their depressive symptoms. Relationship satisfaction on the preceding day moderated the associations between partner responses and women's depressive symptoms in several significant ways: (1) On days after women reported higher relationship satisfaction than usual, their perception of greater facilitative male partner responses was associated with their decreased depression; (2) on days after women reported lower relationship satisfaction than usual, their perception of greater negative male partner responses was associated with their increased depression; (3) on days after men reported higher relationship satisfaction than usual, their self-reported higher negative responses were associated with decreased women's depression, and higher solicitous responses were associated with increased women's depression, whereas (4) on days after men reported lower relationship satisfaction than usual, their self-reported higher negative responses were related to increased women's depression, and higher solicitous responses were associated with decreased women's depression. Targeting partner responses and relationship satisfaction may enhance the quality of interventions aimed at reducing depression in women with vulvodynia.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".