MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404959105 · doi:10.3390/socsci13120650

Sexual Well-Being in Old Age: Effectiveness of an Intervention Program to Promote Sexual Well-Being in Older Community-Dwelling Adults

2024· article· en· W4404959105 on OpenAlexaff
Sofia von Humboldt, Gail Low, Isabel Leal

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Sciences · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsMacEwan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)Successful agingPsychological interventionLife satisfactionGerontologyScale (ratio)PsychologyMental healthClinical psychologyMedicinePsychiatrySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: While many people strive for a fulfilling sexual life as they age, the inevitable changes that come with aging can present significant challenges concerning their sexual well-being (SWB). This study aims to present a comparative analysis of the scores in the variables of sexual satisfaction, adjustment to aging (AtA), and satisfaction with life (SwL) before and after the implementation of an intervention program to promote SWB among older adults. Methods: A convenience sample of 117 older community-dwelling adults (M = 72.31; SD = 5.752) were included in this study, and an ex post facto longitudinal design was applied. A six-week intervention program aimed at improving older adults’ understanding and exchanging their experiences of SWB was performed. The following measures were utilized: (1) a sociodemographic, health and lifestyle questionnaire; (2) Adjustment to Aging Scale (AtAS); (3) Satisfaction with Life Scale (SwLS); (4) New Sexual Satisfaction Scale (NSSS-S); and (5) Mini-Mental Status Exam (MMSE). The specified assessment time points in this study were as follows: baseline and after intervention. A follow-up assessment was conducted 6 months and 12 months after the baseline measurement. Results: The results indicated an increase in the scores in sexual satisfaction, AtA, and SwL from before to after the intervention among the intervention group. Conclusions: The development of intervention programs in older communities is necessary to contribute to the enhancing older adults’ SWB and to explore the best practices for implementing tailored interventions within community settings.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.639
Threshold uncertainty score0.612

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.339 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial SciencesSame topicSexual function and dysfunction studiesFrench-language works237,207