MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210560637 · doi:10.1186/s12889-021-12390-4

Effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on sexual functioning and activity: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2022· review· en· W4210560637 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Public Health · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Meta-analysis2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)BiostatisticsCoronavirus InfectionsBetacoronavirusPublic healthEpidemiologyVirologyMEDLINEEnvironmental healthPathologyInfectious disease (medical specialty)DiseaseOutbreak

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Since December 2019, when it was first reported in Wuhan, province of Hubei, China, the new virus SARS-CoV-2 has spread rapidly around the world and has become a global pandemic. During the COVID-19 pandemic, due to the public health measures implemented, people's sexual activity has also been affected. Restrictions on people's activities, reduced sports activities, economic issues, increased psychological stress, and reduced entertainment have, indeed, dramatically impacted sexual activity and functioning. The purpose of this study was tosystematically identify, collect and summarize the existing body of evidence from published studies on the effects of COVID-19 pandemic on sexual activity and functioning. METHODS: Several scholarly databases, namely MEDLINE (via PubMed interface), Web of Science (WOS), Embase, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, Scopus, and PsycINFO databases, were mined from December 2019 to the end of January 2021. We utilized a random-effect meta-analytical model to analyze all the data. More in detail, the Standardized Mean Difference (SMD) was used in order to estimate and evaluate the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on sexual activity and functioning. RESULTS: Twenty-one studies were included in the present study. In total, 2454 women and 3765 men were evaluated. In the present meta-analysis, sexual functioning and activity were assessed by means of two standardized and reliable tools, namely the "Female Sexual Function Index" (FSFI) and the "International Index of Erectile Function-5 items" (IIEF-5). A total of 5 studies reported the FSFI score before and after the COVID-19 pandemic in female participants. Based on the random-effect model, the SMD was computed to be - 4.26 [95% confidence interval or CI: - 7.26, - 1.25], being statistically significant. A total of 3 studies reported the IIEF-5 score before and after the COVID-19 pandemic in male participants. Based on the random-effect model, the SMD was computed to be - 0.66 [CI 95%: - 0.99, - 0.33], being statistically significant. In the majority of these studies, participants reported a reduction in the number of sexual relations and an increase in the frequency of solo sex activity, especially masturbation, compared to the time prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSION: The results of the present study showed that COVID-19 related restrictions were correlated with higher rates of sexual dysfunction and reduced sexual activity; however, results of the current meta-analytical study show that this change in sexual functioning was greater in women compared to men. Sex is one of the dimensions of every person's life; therefore, researchers should identify the factors that lead to sexual dysfunction due to COVID-19 pandemic in their community. In this regard, sexologists should design and implement effective programs to reduce the heterogeneous causes affecting sexual functioning, given the psychological strain that the COVID-19 pandemic puts on individuals.

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.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.943
Threshold uncertainty score0.923

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.416
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.036 · 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