Evaluation of predictor factors of psychological distress in women with unexplained infertility
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: The objective of this study was to establish the frequency of anxiety and depressive symptoms among women diagnosed with unexplained infertility and to identify risk factors. Methods: We conducted a descriptive cross-sectional study. Forty-two women from the CHU de Quebec fertility clinic were recruited. Women completed the ‘Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale’ (HADS) self-administered questionnaire, used to estimate prevalence of anxiety and depressive symptoms (score ≥ 8). Results: Overall, 55% ( n = 23) of participants were identified with anxiety or depressive symptoms according to the HADS questionnaire. Anxiety symptoms were more frequent (55%) compared with depressive symptoms (10%). According to a logistic regression model, being under 35 years old [odds ratio (OR) = 16.6, confidence interval (CI): 1.9–25.0], never had a previous spontaneous abortion (OR = 5.6, CI: 1.1–43.5) and never sought fertility treatment (OR = 5.5, CI: 1.1–45.4) were associated with a higher risk of anxiety and depressive symptoms. Conclusion: Anxiety and depressive symptoms are common among women with unexplained infertility, and strategies should be developed to better support and treat this high-risk population.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".