Pelvic Organ Prolapse Takes Up Space in the Bedroom: A Mixed Method Exploration of the Circular Sexual Response Cycle in Women With Pelvic Organ Prolapse
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is a multidimensional reproductive health issue, which negatively affects women’s sexual well-being. Using the circular sexual response cycle as a framework, we sought to evaluate women’s sexual experiences living with POP. Methods Measures of genital self-image, sexual distress, sexual satisfaction, and sexual function were administered before conducting semistructured interviews. Participants were 16 heterosexual partnered women seeking surgical and nonsurgical treatment for symptomatic POP. Results Standardized questionnaires indicated normal genital self-image, sexual satisfaction, and sexual function; however, sexual distress scores exceeded normal cutoffs. Eight themes emerged, including reasons for having sex, willingness to initiate and sexual receptivity, contextual factors, sexual stimuli, sexual arousal, responsive desire, outcomes, and spontaneous sexual desire. In contrast to quantitative findings, themes demonstrated sexual difficulty. Women with POP mainly engage in sex out of obligation and report reduced sexual initiation and receptiveness, as well as a negative impact on genital self-image. Pelvic organ prolapse was perceived to adversely affect subjective arousal, responsive desire, and spontaneous desire, despite intact physiological arousal. Difficulty experiencing subjective arousal was profound and seemed to be limited by preoccupation with POP. Sexual satisfaction and rewards were diminished after POP, including orgasmic capacity. Rewarding motivators to engage in sex were seldom discussed and often overshadowed by experiencing guilt and obligation related to sex. Conclusions The circular sexual response cycle largely fit participants’ experiences; however, POP inhibits subjective arousal, which prevents responsive desire for many. Patients may need better support to cope with preoccupation with POP, indicating that addressing the psychosocial symptoms of POP should be prioritized.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".