Daily perceived stress and sexual health in couples with sexual interest/arousal disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Sexual Interest/Arousal Disorder (SIAD) is a common and distressing sexual health concern that may add stress to couple's daily lives and maintain the low sexual desire/arousal. While stress has been linked to lower sexual desire, sexual satisfaction, and higher sexual distress in cross-sectional studies with community couples, dyadic research at the intersection of stress and sexual health is scarce. We examined the daily associations between perceived stress and sexual health among couples coping with SIAD. Methods: = 34.94) completed online validated measures of perceived stress, sexual desire, satisfaction, and distress for 56 days. Data were analyzed with residual dynamic structural equation modeling guided by the Actor-Partner Independence Model. Results: On days when individuals with SIAD perceived more stress than usual, they and their partners reported lower sexual satisfaction and desire, and higher sexual distress. On days when partners perceived more stress, they and individuals with SIAD reported lower sexual satisfaction and desire, and partners also reported higher sexual distress. Between-person results across the diary period showed similar patterns, though fewer effects overall. Conclusion: Findings highlight dyadic processes in sexual health whereby one partner's daily stress was associated with lower sexual health for both partners. Stress might orient partners away from sensitive support provision and interfere with intimacy, which is crucial to sexual health. Interventions fostering sexual health in couples with SIAD should include a focus on stress management.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".