MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3136317287 · doi:10.1016/j.jsxm.2021.01.184

Validation of the Maternal and Partner Sex During Pregnancy Scales (MSP/PSP) in Portugal: Assessing Dyadic Interdependence and Associations with Sexual Behaviors

2021· article· en· W3136317287 on OpenAlexaff
Inês M. Tavares, Julia R. Heiman, Natalie O. Rosen, Pedro Nobre

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Sexual Medicine · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAdolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersFundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
KeywordsPsychologyIntraclass correlationPortugueseClinical psychologyDevelopmental psychologyDemographyPsychometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The Maternal and Partner Sex During Pregnancy Scales (MSP/PSP) are self-report measures of expectant couples' attitudes towards sex during pregnancy. AIM: This study aimed to examine dyadic non-independence of MSP/PSP scores in a sample of expectant couples, while providing an evaluation of factor structure, validity, and reliability of the Portuguese versions of the MSP/PSP. The association between partners' attitudes and frequency of sexual behaviors was also examined. METHODS: A total of 189 expectant couples completed a survey that included a sociodemographic questionnaire, the MSP/PSP, frequency of sexual behaviors, as well as validated measures of attitudes to sex, sexual function, sexual satisfaction, depression, and perceived social support. OUTCOMES: Dyadic interdependence was tested via Pearson correlation between MSP/PSP scores; between-dyads variability was tested via intraclass correlation of the unconditional model including only MSP/PSP scores using a multi-level model. Associations between attitudes and sexual behavior were tested using regression analysis (between-dyads outcomes) or APIM (mixed outcomes). Factor structure, internal consistency, and validity (convergent, discriminant, and concurrent) of the Portuguese versions of the scales were assessed. RESULTS: MSP/PSP scores were interdependent within-dyads. Male partners presented significantly more positive attitudes towards sex during pregnancy than pregnant women. Attitudes were linked to indices of sexual well-being for both partners (sexual functioning, sexual satisfaction) and, for both partners, more positive attitudes were associated with higher frequencies of most partnered sexual behaviors. The Portuguese MSP/PSP scales showed good factor structure, and good to excellent indices of reliability and validity. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The Portuguese MSP/PSP is adequate for use in couples. The scales can be used to screen partners with negative attitudes towards sex during pregnancy and evaluate how these attitudes relate to intra- and inter-individual sexual well-being during pregnancy. STRENGTHS & LIMITATIONS: A strength of this study is the inclusion of both expectant partners and the use of dyadic analysis. Couples who participated in the study were all in mixed-gender/sex relationships, although this was not defined as an inclusion criterion. Future studies should use the MSP/PSP in more diverse samples in order to further determine how the scale performs for couples with different characteristics. CONCLUSION: Scores in the MSP/PSP are interdependent between mixed-sex/gender expectant couple members. More positive attitudes towards sex during pregnancy are linked to higher frequencies of partnered sexual behaviors and to both partners' greater sexual well-being. Tavares Inês M., Heiman Julia R., Rosen Natalie O., et al. Validation of the Maternal and Partner Sex During Pregnancy Scales (MSP/PSP) in Portugal: Assessing Dyadic Interdependence and Associations with Sexual Behaviors. J Sex Med Rev 2021;18:789-799.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.341 · 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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Sexual MedicineSame topicAdolescent Sexual and Reproductive HealthFrench-language works237,207