Perceptions of the effects of childbirth on sexuality among nulliparous individuals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Media representations of sexuality after childbirth depict vaginal birth as harmful and cesarean delivery as protective, although research does not support these depictions. The objective of the current study was to investigate perceptions of the effects of mode of delivery on sexuality. METHODS: Nulliparous participants who were able to and interested in giving birth (N = 1428) completed an online survey about their preferences for mode of delivery and their perceptions of childbirth as they specifically relate to sexuality. Participants provided demographic information, rated how influential different sources of information about childbirth were, and completed the Attitudes Toward Women's Genitals Scale. RESULTS: Up to half (16-48%), the participants agreed with different statements about vaginal birth as harmful to, and cesarean delivery as protective of, future sexuality. Participant characteristics that were independently predictive of endorsing these beliefs were: self-identifying as heterosexual, holding negative attitudes toward women's genitals, and reporting that reality media, nonreality media, and online media sources are influential sources of childbirth information. Participants who rated health care professionals as an influential source of information were less likely to endorse these beliefs. CONCLUSION: Given that there is no clear evidence in the empirical literature to support the claim that vaginal births are harmful and cesarean delivery is protective to one's future sexual life, it is important to dispel the existing misconceptions. Various media sources likely play a role in the perpetuation of this misinformation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".