A Study of Couple Burnout in Infertile Couples
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Infertility is a major crisis that can cause psychological problems and emotionally distressing experiences, and eventually affect a couples' relationship. The objective of this study is to investigate couple burnout in infertile couples who were undergoing treatmentat the Infertility Clinic of Yazd, Iran. METHOD: The present study is a cross-sectional descriptive one on 98 infertile couples referringto the Infertility Centerof Yazd, Iran, who were chosen on a simple random sampling basis. The measuring tools consisted of the Couple Burnout Measure (CBM) and a demographic questionnaire. The collected data were analyzed using SPSS 16 and the statistical tests of ANOVA and t-test.P-values less than 0.05 were considered as significant. RESULTS: The results show that infertile women experience higher levels of couple burnout than their husbands (p<0.001). Also, a comparison of the scales of couple burnout--psychological burnout (p<0.01), somatic burnout (p<0.01), and emotional burnout (p<0.001)--between wives and husbands show that women are at greater risk. CONCLUSION: Infertile couples' emotional, mental, and sexual problems need to be addressed as part of the infertility treatment programs, and psychotherapists should be included in the medical team.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".