Consequences of impaired female sexual functioning: Individual differences and associations with sexual distress
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A number of risk factors for sexual distress have been identified, including impairments in sexual function. However, for women, sexual function is only weakly associated with distress levels in many cases. One reason for this disconnect may be that impaired sexual function can have a variety of consequences for the individual's sexual experience and that some consequences may be more or less distressing to different people. Research suggests that some consequences of impaired sexual function may be more distressing to older women and/or for women in longer or less satisfying relationships. To examine the association between consequences of impaired female sexual function and distress, 75 women reporting one or more recurrent difficulties with sexual function in the past month were assessed. Frequency of sexual consequences including decreased physical pleasure, decreased sexual frequency, and negative partner emotional responses, were associated with sexual distress after controlling for the effects of sexual function. Additionally, a number of sexual consequences were rated as more distressing by older women and women in unsatisfying relationships. The idiosyncratic ways in which impairments in sexual function play out in the context of sexual activity may be an important target of future research and clinical interventions for sexual dysfunction.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".