Determinants of Postpartum Sexual Dysfunction in the First Year: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Objectives: This systematic review synthesized somatic and psychosocial determinants of postpartum sexual dysfunction (PSD) during the first 12 months after childbirth. Methods: Following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, we searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus from inception to 4 August 2025 without language limits for the indexed records. Eligible studies enrolled postpartum women (≤12 months) and reported validated sexual outcomes (FSFI/FSFI-6, PISQ-12), dyspareunia, or sexual activity, examining breastfeeding, partner support/body image, perineal trauma/instrumentation, or postpartum perineal/musculoskeletal pain. Two reviewers independently screened and extracted data; risk of bias was assessed with a modified Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. Results: Of 1127 records screened, 15 studies were included. Perineal morbidity and early pain consistently tracked with worse sexual outcomes; assisted vaginal birth increased 6-month dyspareunia odds (OR 2.5). Breastfeeding was often associated with lower early sexual function and higher dyspareunia (6-month dyspareunia OR 4.4), with attenuation by 12 months. Higher partner/family support and more positive body image correlated with better FSFI scores. Heterogeneity in timing, measures, and adjustment precluded meta-analysis; results were narratively synthesized. Conclusions: Perineal trauma and early pain are dominant risk signals; breastfeeding-related symptoms exert early and context-dependent effects; psychosocial resources are protective.
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 | 0.010 | 0.045 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".