Perceived Injustice and Psychological Well-Being in Couples Seeking Fertility Treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Infertility and its treatment are associated with a host of negative emotions, including perceived injustice. However, no quantitative study has examined the link between perceived injustice and psychological difficulties in couples seeking fertility treatment. This study examined the associations between perceived injustice and both partners’ psychological well-being and investigated possible differences in perceived injustice based on sex or cause of infertility. Both partners of 103 couples seeking fertility treatment completed the Injustice Experience Questionnaire—Infertility, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and the Fertility Quality of Life Tool. Perceived injustice was associated with one’s own and one’s partner’s higher depressive symptoms and lower infertility-related quality of life, as well as one’s own higher anxiety symptoms. Women also perceived more injustice than men. The cause of infertility was unrelated to perceived injustice. Findings suggest that perceived injustice could represent an intervention target to reduce psychological distress in infertile couples.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".