MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416379369 · doi:10.1177/10775595251394954

Couples’ Childhood Maltreatment Profiles and Trajectories of Sexual Health Over One Year

2025· article· en· W4416379369 on OpenAlexaff
Sophie Bergeron, Natalie O. Rosen, Beáta Bőthe, Marie‐Ève Daspe, Katherine Péloquin, Natacha Godbout, Audrey Brassard, Noémie Bigras, Marie‐Pier Vaillancourt‐Morel

Bibliographic record

VenueChild Maltreatment · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Abuse and Trauma
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversité du Québec en OutaouaisUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresDalhousie UniversityUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDistressSexual abusePoison controlReproductive healthSexual functionInjury preventionSexual behaviorOccupational safety and health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study examined couples’ childhood maltreatment (CM) profiles and their associations with both partners’ sexual health over one year. Participants were 885 couples ( M age = 31.22) who completed measures of CM (baseline) and sexual satisfaction, distress and function (baseline, 6- and 12-months). Dyadic latent profile analyses yielded five profiles: Partner 1 Neglected , Low CM , Partner 2 Physically Abused , Partner 2 Sexually Abused , and Partner 1 Sexually Abused . Initial levels of sexual satisfaction, distress and function showed the greatest sexual health in Low CM and the worst in Partner 1 Neglected . Decreases in sexual satisfaction were steeper in Partner 1 Sexually Abused than Low CM ; sexual distress decreased for Low CM and increased for Partner 1 Neglected and Partner 2 Sexually Abused ; decreases in sexual function were steeper in Partner 1 Neglected and Partner 2 Sexually Abused than Low CM . Profiles involving greater CM are associated with worse sexual health.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.473
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.271 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChild MaltreatmentSame topicChild Abuse and TraumaFrench-language works237,207