050 Feasibility of Adding a Sexual Function Questionnaire to a Preconception Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Introduction Sexual dysfunction is estimated to affect over 40% of women and influences intercourse frequency and enjoyment. Despite its critical role in conception, little research has focused on sexual function during the preconception period. Objective We assessed the feasibility of adding a sexual function questionnaire to an ongoing preconception cohort study. Methods The [blinded preconception cohort study] began in 2013 and has prospectively enrolled over 15,000 women aged 21-45 years to date. Women planning a pregnancy are recruited primarily via online advertisements on social media. In March 2021, a supplemental survey module on sexual health and wellness was added to the study protocol. This survey included 32 questions on a range of topics related to sexual health, including the 6-item Female Sexual Function Index, questions about orgasm, and patient-provider communication about sexual health during preconception health care visits. The supplemental survey takes approximately 5-7 minutes to complete. Participants were invited to complete the supplemental questionnaire 30 days after enrolling and completing the baseline questionnaire. Results Of the 406 participants who started the survey, 397 (97.8%) completed it. The sample was primarily between 25 and 34 years old, with 54% having been trying to conceive for 0-1 months. The vast majority of the sample (87.1%) had been trying to conceive for 6 months or fewer. Eighty percent of the participants lived in the United States, and 20% lived in Canada. The vast majority (84.2%) were married. One-hundred thirty-seven participants (34.3%) reported experiencing painful intercourse at least sometimes in the past four weeks. Ninety-nine (24.5%) participants reported no, very low, or low sexual desire or interest in the past four weeks. Sixty-seven (16.5%) participants reported low or very low levels of arousal during sexual activity. Seventy (17.5%) participants reported being very or moderately dissatisfied with their sex lives in the past four weeks. The majority of women (80.9%) reported seeing a healthcare provider for a preconception counseling visit at some point prior to enrollment. Of these, 238 (74.1%) did not discuss sexual issues during the visit, even though 35% were experiencing them. Participants readily provided details in the open-ended text fields, indicating a willingness to share their information with investigators. Conclusions Our results suggest that incorporation of a detailed questionnaire about sexual function was acceptable to a large number of participants in a preconception cohort study. Our preliminary results will provide valuable insights into the sexual function and health of women in the preconception period. Disclosure Work supported by industry: yes, by This cohort study has received in-kind donations from Swiss Precision Diagnostics, Sandstone Diagnostics, Fertility- Friend.com, and Kindara.com for primary data collection. A consultant, employee (part time or full time) or shareholder is among the authors (Lauren Wise has served as a consultant for AbbVie, Inc).
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 | 0.033 | 0.044 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.004 |
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".