MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3088127827 · doi:10.1016/j.jsxm.2020.08.015

Partner Responses to Low Desire: Associations with Sexual, Relational, and Psychological Well-Being Among Couples Coping with Female Sexual Interest/Arousal Disorder

2020· article· en· W3088127827 on OpenAlexafffund
Natalie O. Rosen, Serena Corsini‐Munt, Justin P. Dubé, Carmen Boudreau, Amy Muise

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Sexual Medicine · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioYork UniversitySaint Mary's UniversityUniversity of OttawaIzaak Walton Killam Health CentreDalhousie University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research CouncilSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPsychologyPartner effectsSexual desireDistressAnxietySexual arousalClinical psychologyArousalCoping (psychology)Interpersonal relationshipPersonal distressDevelopmental psychologyPsychiatryHuman sexualitySexual behaviorSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The experience of distressing low sexual interest/arousal-female sexual interest/arousal disorder (FSIAD)-is prevalent in women of all ages and is associated with poorer sexual, relationship, and psychological well-being than women without this difficulty. Women who are partnered are almost 5 times more likely to be distressed by low desire and to receive a diagnosis of FSIAD than unpartnered women, indicating that interpersonal factors are highly relevant, although largely neglected in past research. AIM: In a dyadic cross-sectional and longitudinal study, we examined whether partner responses to FSIAD were associated with the sexual, relationship, and psychological well-being of couples, and whether any effects persisted 1 year later. METHODS: Women diagnosed with FSIAD (N = 89) completed a validated measure of perceived partner positive vs negative responses to their low sexual interest/arousal and their partners reported on their own responses, as well as measures of sexual desire, sexual satisfaction, relationship satisfaction, sexual distress, and anxiety. 1 year later, couples (N = 66) completed the outcome measures again. Data were analyzed according to the Actor-Partner Interdependence Model. OUTCOMES: Outcomes included were the Sexual Desire Inventory-Solitary and Partner-Focused Subscales; Global Measure of Sexual Satisfaction; Female Sexual Distress Scale; Couple Satisfaction Index; and State-Trait Anxiety Inventory-Short-Form. RESULTS: When women with FSIAD perceived more positive partner responses (eg, warm, supportive, compassionate) than negative responses (eg, hostile, unsupportive, indifferent), they were more satisfied with the relationship and they and their partners reported lower anxiety. When partners reported more positive than negative responses, they had greater relationship and sexual satisfaction and lower sexual distress and anxiety. Exploratory analyses revealed that women's perceptions of their partners' responses accounted for the link between partners' own responses and women's relationship satisfaction and anxiety. Partner responses did not predict any change in outcomes over time. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Findings support interpersonal conceptualizations of FSIAD and may inform the development of future couple-based interventions. STRENGTHS & LIMITATIONS: This study is one of the few dyadic investigations of FSIAD, as diagnosed via a clinical interview. Significant associations were only observed cross-sectionally, limiting causal conclusions. There was limited power to detect longitudinal effects. CONCLUSION: More positive responses to women's low sexual interest/arousal by partners is linked to better adjustment among couples affected by FSIAD. Rosen NO, Corsini-Munt S, Dubé JP, et al. Partner Responses to Low Desire: Associations With Sexual, Relational, and Psychological Well-Being Among Couples Coping With Female Sexual Interest/Arousal Disorder. J Sex Med 2020;17:2168-2180.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.138
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations23
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Sexual MedicineSame topicSexual function and dysfunction studiesFrench-language works237,207