MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2137499842 · doi:10.1177/0265407509106705

The well-being of cohabiting and married couples during pregnancy: Does pregnancy planning matter?

2009· article· en· W2137499842 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mylène Lachance‐Grzela, Geneviève Bouchard

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Social and Personal Relationships · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFamily Dynamics and Relationships
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Moncton
FundersEconomic and Social Research Council
KeywordsCohabitationPregnancyPsychologyAnxietyFertilityFamily planningDepression (economics)Developmental psychologyMedicinePsychiatryEnvironmental healthResearch methodologyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cohabiting women are less likely to plan their pregnancies than married women. Research on marital and pregnancy statuses remains distinct and, consequently, the effects of both variables are confounded. The aim of the present study was to examine the moderational role of pregnancy planning in the relationship between marital status and future parents' well-being. A sample of 154 French-Canadian couples expecting their first child completed assessments of pregnancy planning and of well-being (i.e., anxiety, depression, satisfaction with life, and dyadic adjustment) during the third trimester of pregnancy. Results show that pregnancy planning efforts contribute to future parents' well-being only if they are married. Similarly, marriage offers more benefits than cohabitation, but only if partners have planned the pregnancy.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.148
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations17
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Social and Personal RelationshipsSame topicFamily Dynamics and RelationshipsFrench-language works237,207