A Longitudinal Examination of Common Dyadic Coping and Sexual Distress in New Parent Couples during the Transition to Parenthood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
New parents experience significant disruption to their sexual relationships such as lower desire and sexual frequency relative to prepregnancy. Little is known about the sexual distress new parents feel related to these changes, how sexual distress evolves over time, or how coping with stress relates to this distress. New parent couples who engage in more adaptive, joint coping with mutual stressors-common dyadic coping (CDC)-may be better able to manage distress related to their sexuality and thus, experience less sexual distress at 3-months postpartum and experience more marked improvement over time. In 99 first-time parent couples, we examined the link between CDC measured at 3-months postpartum and trajectories of sexual distress across 3-, 6-, and 12-months postpartum. Analyses used dyadic latent growth curve modeling informed by the actor-partner interdependence model. Mothers' sexual distress at 3-months postpartum was clinically elevated and higher than their partner's. Mothers' sexual distress declined significantly over time, whereas partners' sexual distress remained low and stable. An individual's higher perceptions of CDC was significantly associated with their own (but not their partner's) lower sexual distress at 3-months postpartum. No significant associations were found between CDC and change in sexual distress over time. How new parents jointly cope with stressors early in the postpartum period may lessen the distress they have about their sexuality at a time when most couples have just resumed sexual activity. Results identify CDC as a possible novel target for interventions aimed at helping couples manage sexual distress during the transition to parenthood.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".