Intimacy, sexual satisfaction, and sexual distress in vulvodynia couples: An observational study.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Vulvodynia is a prevalent idiopathic pain condition with deleterious consequences for the sexuality of affected women and their spouses. Intimacy has been identified as a facilitator of adjustment to health difficulties in couples. Two components of intimacy were examined among couples with vulvodynia-empathic response and disclosure-in relation to their sexual satisfaction and sexual distress. METHOD: Using an observational design, 50 women (Mage = 24.50 years, SD = 4.03) diagnosed with vulvodynia and their spouses (Mage = 26.10 years, SD = 5.70) participated in a filmed discussion focusing on the impact of vulvodynia on their lives. Empathic response and disclosure were assessed by a trained observer and self-reported by participants after engaging in the discussion. The actor-partner interdependence model guided the data analyses. RESULTS: Women's and spouses' higher observed and perceived empathic responses were associated with their own and their partners' greater sexual satisfaction. Women's and spouses' higher perceived disclosures were associated with their own and their partners' greater sexual satisfaction. Women's and spouses' higher observed empathic responses were associated with their own lower sexual distress. Women's higher observed empathic responses were associated with their spouses' lower sexual distress. Women and spouses' perceived greater empathic responses were associated with their own lower sexual distress. Women's and spouses' greater perceived disclosures during the discussion were associated with their own and their partners' lower sexual distress. CONCLUSION: Promoting empathic response and disclosure through couple interventions may buffer against the sexual distress and sexual dissatisfaction of couples coping with vulvodynia. (PsycINFO Database Record
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".