Sexual Assertiveness Mediates the Associations Between Partner Facilitative Responses and Sexual Outcomes in Women With Provoked Vestibulodynia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Provoked vestibulodynia (PVD) is a recurrent idiopathic vulvo-vaginal pain associated with negative sexual and psychological consequences. Facilitative partner responses to pain are currently receiving empirical attention because they are positively associated with women's sexual outcomes. However, the mechanisms through which facilitative responses to pain are associated with these outcomes have not been examined. One potential mechanism is sexual assertiveness, which has been found to be associated with better sexual function and satisfaction in women with PVD. The present study examined whether women's sexual assertiveness mediated the association between women's perception of facilitative partner responses and women's sexual function and satisfaction. Women (N = 140) with PVD symptomatology completed self-reported questionnaires evaluating their perception of their partners' facilitative responses, and their own sexual assertiveness, sexual function, and sexual satisfaction. Dependent measures were sexual function measured by the Female Sexual Function Index and sexual satisfaction assessed by the Global Measure of Sexual Satisfaction Scale. Results indicated that women's higher sexual assertiveness mediated the association between their greater perceived facilitative partner responses and their improved sexual function and satisfaction. Findings suggest a potential mechanism through which partner responses may be associated with women's sexual outcomes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".