The association of disordered eating and sexual health with relationship satisfaction in female service members/veterans.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Low relationship satisfaction is associated with mental health disorders in service members/veterans (SM/Vs), yet eating disordered behavior (EDB) and sexual function and satisfaction in SM/Vs are understudied. Those with EDB may experience bodily discomfort that may be associated with low relationship satisfaction because of avoidance of physical contact and intimacy, suggesting that sexual satisfaction and function may modify the association of EDB and relationship satisfaction. As the majority of female SM/Vs are partnered, it is imperative to study the association of sexual function and satisfaction with EDB and relationship satisfaction. Partnered female SM/Vs (N = 479) completed an online survey assessing demographic characteristics (e.g., relationship duration, deployment history), EDB, sexual satisfaction and function, and relationship satisfaction measures. Thirty-three percent, 20%, and 58% of the sample reported scores consistent with relational distress, probable eating disorder, and sexual dysfunction, respectively. After adjusting for covariates, EBD was negatively associated with relationship satisfaction with a small-to-medium effect size. Sexual satisfaction and function had a significant indirect effect on the association of EDB and relationship satisfaction, suggesting that sexual satisfaction and function accounted for some of the variance between these 2 variables. Screening for EDB, sexual satisfaction, and sexual function among partnered female SM/Vs may provide critical insight into mechanisms of relational distress. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".