Longitudinal associations between relational and sexual well‐being in couples transitioning to parenthood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is limited understanding of the dynamic between relational and sexual well-being as couples adjust to new parenthood, despite this being a vulnerable period for couples' relationships. This study was aimed at examining the bidirectional links between relationship quality and sexual well-being (i.e., sexual satisfaction, sexual distress) across the transition to parenthood. We assessed new parent couples (N = 257) across four time points (two prenatal) from mid-pregnancy through 6 months postpartum. Parallel dyadic latent growth curve modeling was employed to examine the associations between trajectories of perceived relationship quality, sexual satisfaction, and sexual distress. New parents' declines in relationship quality were associated with declines in own and partners' sexual satisfaction and with increases in own sexual distress. Mothers' prenatal relationship quality and sexual distress predicted subsequent changes in own sexual distress and fathers' relationship quality, respectively. Results indicate that changes to new parents' relational and sexual well-being mutually influence each other over time. Current results indicate that the impact of the transition on couples' relationships is partly determined by own and partners' prenatal factors, to which clinicians and researchers can attend to early on. Cross-domain links between relational and sexual well-being should be considered in research and clinical practice.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".