MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2792510378 · doi:10.1177/1359105318764283

Moving forward together, stronger, and closer: An interpretative phenomenological analysis of marital benefits in infertile couples

2018· article· en· W2792510378 on OpenAlexaff
Marie-Soleil Sauvé, Katherine Péloquin, Audrey Brassard

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Health Psychology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Health and Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterpretative phenomenological analysisFeelingPsychologyFertilitySocial psychologyFaithInfertilityDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologyQualitative researchSociologyPregnancyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Some couples find in infertility the bonding opportunities that reinforce their relationship. Using an interpretative phenomenological analysis, this study examined marital benefits in three couples seeking fertility treatment. Interviews revealed five types of benefits: being engaged in a shared hardship, feeling closer to one another, feeling reassured in the relationship, developing a satisfying communication and support behaviors, and having faith in the couple's capacity to face adversity. A dyadic analysis also illustrated how marital benefits developed in each couple. Marital benefits nourished marital satisfaction, thus underscoring their importance to help couples cope through fertility treatment.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.220
Threshold uncertainty score0.389

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.368 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations18
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Health PsychologySame topicReproductive Health and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207