Intolerance of uncertainty, intimacy, and sexual well-being among first-time parents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although many challenges inherent to the birth of a first child are likely to interfere with new parent couples’ sexuality, sexual well-being has often been neglected during the transition to parenthood. Considering the numerous uncertainties arising in this period, it is relevant to study whether first-time parents’ intolerance of uncertainty could contribute to their lower sexual well-being and explore whether their perception of intimacy could explain this association. The aim of this study was to investigate the roles of intolerance of uncertainty and intimacy in first-time parents’ sexual well-being (i.e., sexual desire and sexual satisfaction). A total of 211 couples expecting their first child were recruited in a province of Canada to participate in a broader longitudinal study. Bearing mothers and their partners answered validated questionnaires measuring sexual desire, sexual satisfaction, intolerance of uncertainty, depression symptoms, and perceived intimacy at 4, 8, and 12 months postpartum. Dyadic path analyses revealed that, controlling for postpartum depression symptoms at 12 months postpartum, mothers’ intolerance of uncertainty at 4 months postpartum was associated with both partners’ lower sexual satisfaction at 12 months postpartum through their own lower perception of intimacy at 8 months postpartum. Mothers’ intolerance of uncertainty at 4 months postpartum was also associated with partners’ lower sexual desire at 12 months postpartum through their own lower perception of intimacy at 8 months postpartum. Better understanding these individual and interpersonal factors associated with first-time parents’ sexual well-being could help in educating expecting couples and preventing sexual challenges they may encounter.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".