Determining the Role of Gender in Relation between Sexual Desire and Quality of Life in Patients with Major Depression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: This study sought to investigate the rule of gender in the relation between sexual desire and quality of life in Measure Depression Disorder. Materials & Methods: In this cross-sectional study, 134 subjects (67 male, 67 female) with Measure Depression Disorder were selected through a randomized sampling method from psychology and psychiatry out pationt centers in Tehran. Data for sexual desire were obtained by a single item measure of Beck Depression Inventory-2 and f quality of life by Short Form 36 (SF-36) and McGill Quality-of-Life Questionnaire. The bivariate correlations between the quality-of-life sub-domains and sexual desire were analyzed with the Pearson test in the males and females, separately. Results: There was no statistically significant difference between the two genders with respect to sexual desire (P=0.230). The SF-36 showed that sexual desire correlated in both genders with pain (r=-0.456 and P<0.001 for the males r=-0.308 and P=0.011 for the females). The SF-36 also demonstrated the correlation between sexual desire and physical functioning variables (r=-0.457, P<0.001), role limitation due to physical problems (r=-0.325, P=0.007), role limitation secondary to emotional problems (r=-0.325, P<0.007), fatigue (r=-0.294, P=0.016), emotional well-being (r=-0.368, P=0.02), and social functioning (r=-0.483, P<0.001). The McGill inventory questionnaire demonstrated correlations between sexual desire and psychological well-being (r=0.255, P=0.037), existential well-being (r=0.293, P=0.016), and social support (r=0.425, P<0.001) in the men. Conclusion: The more and extent link between sexual desire and quality of life in Major Depression Disorder showed the more effect of changes in sexual desire due to depression on quality of life in male than female subjects.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".