SynthesisBMC medical research methodology2018
Systematic review of the psychometric properties of instruments to measure sexual desire.
Synthesis in BMC medical research methodology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 42 citations in OpenAlex.
- Selecting a depression measure for research: A critical examination of five common self-report scales.Journal of affective disorders · 2026Review
- Article
- Validation of Brazilian Version of the Sexual Desire Inventory 2 (SDI-2).Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2024Article
- Validity of the Brazilian online version of the Sexual Desire Inventory 2.Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992) · 2024Article
- Sexual Desire and Erotic Fantasies Questionnaire: The Development and Validation of the Erotic Fantasy Use Scale (SDEF2) on Experience, Attitudes, and Sharing Issues.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Sexual Desire and Erotic Fantasies Questionnaire: Validation of the Erotic Fantasy Inventory Scale (SDEF3) in Italian Adults.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Safe and valid? A systematic review of the psychometric properties of culturally adapted depression scales for use among Indigenous populations.Global mental health (Cambridge, England) · 2023Review
- Screening for Low Energy Availability in Male Athletes: Attempted Validation of LEAM-Q.Nutrients · 2022Article
- Associations between Cues of Sexual Desire and Sexual Attitudes in Portuguese Women.European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education · 2021Article
- Creating and Validating the DESEA Questionnaire for Men and Women.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSexual desire is one of the domains of sexual function with multiple dimensions, which commonly affects men and women around the world. Classically, its assessment has been applied through self-report tools; however, an issue is related to the evidence level of these questionnaires and their validity. Therefore, a systematic review addressing the available questionnaires is really relevant, since it will be able to show their psychometric properties and evidence levels.
methodA systematic review was carried out in the PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Science Direct, and Web of Science databases. The search strategy was developed according to the following research question and combination of descriptors and keywords, including original studies with no limit of publication date and in Portuguese, English, and Spanish. Two reviewers carried out the selection of articles by abstracts and full texts as well as the analysis of the studies independently. The methodological quality of the instruments was evaluated by the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist.
resultsThe search resulted in 1203 articles, of which 15 were included in the review. It identified 10 instruments originally developed in the English language. Unsatisfactory results on methodological quality were evidenced in cultural adaptation studies with no description of the steps of the processes and inadequacy of techniques and parameters of adequacy for models. The Principal Component Analysis with Varimax rotation predominated in the studies.
conclusionsThe limitation of the techniques applied in the validation process of the reviewed instruments was evident. A limitation was observed in the number of adaptations conducted and contexts to which the instruments were applied, making it impossible to reach a better understanding of the functioning of instruments. In future studies, the use of robust techniques can ensure the quality of the psychometric properties and the accuracy and stability of instruments. A detailed description of procedures and results in validation studies may facilitate the selection and use of instruments in the academic and/or clinical settings. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42018085706.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.