MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Long‐Term Adjustment of Infertile Couples Following Unsuccessful Medical Intervention

2007· article· en· W2083256148 on OpenAlexaff
Judith C. Daniluk, Elizabeth Tench

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Counseling & Development · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Health and Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFertilityChildlessnessCoping (psychology)PsychologyLife satisfactionDistressClinical psychologySocial supportSelf-esteemIntervention (counseling)Longitudinal studyMedicinePsychiatryPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 33‐month longitudinal study was conducted with 38 infertile couples making the transition to biological childlessness after unsuccessful fertility treatments. Changes in their levels of psychological distress; marital, sexual, and life satisfaction; and self‐esteem were examined. Increased self‐esteem and decreased sexual satisfaction were evident over time. Poorer adjustment was related to having none or few available options, little social support, poor emotional and physical health, and reliance on emotion‐focused coping. Participants who adopted demonstrated better adjustment.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.319 · 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

Citations71
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Counseling & DevelopmentSame topicReproductive Health and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207