ArticleThe journal of sexual medicine2023
Suggestions for modifications to the Female Sexual Function Index based on cognitive interviews with sexual and gender minority individuals and cisgender, heterosexual persons.
Article in The journal of sexual medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sexual dysfunction outcomes and reporting disparities after multimodal treatment for rectal cancer: A systematic review and narrative synthesis.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2026Pooled it
- Psychometric properties of screening tools for mild cognitive impairment in older adults based on COSMIN guidelines: a systematic review.BMC geriatrics · 2025Pooled it
- Psychosexual burden in adult genital psoriasis: outcome measurement, construct coverage, and clinical recognition gaps.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Review
- Attitudes toward mothers as sexual beings and the sexual functioning of parents.The journal of sexual medicine · 2024Article
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 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPatient-reported outcome measures for sexual health were often designed for research studies that included only heterosexual, partnered, and cisgender participants; as such, they may have limited applicability for clinical use among sexual and gender minority (SGM) individuals or those without a partner.
aimWe aimed to conduct cognitive interviews with SGM persons and heterosexual women to determine the readability, comprehension, and applicability of questionnaire items to assess sexual function among diverse sexual and gender identities.
methodsWe conducted 4 rounds of cognitive interviews with 52 participants (28 SGM; 24 cisgender, heterosexual) who provided feedback on the comprehension and wording of questionnaire items and response scales. We used items from the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) and focused on establishing content validity of a modified measure. Participants made recommendations for changes to the questionnaire, which was iteratively revised between interview rounds. Two independent coders analyzed the transcripts using structural coding based on 5 predefined codes: satisfaction with item, specificity/language change needed, missing/suggested item, patient definitions of concepts, and confusion with item. OUTCOMES: Content validity.
resultsAfter 3 rounds of cognitive interviews and revisions to the questionnaire, participants found the final version acceptable and understandable, thereby reaching thematic saturation and establishing content validity of the modified FSFI. Modifications included the following: replacing all instances of "sexual stimulation" and "intercourse" with "sexual activity (alone or with a partner)," broadening the definition of "vaginal penetration" beyond penile-vaginal penetration, and adding skip logic to include the option "no sexual activity." Participants identified missing concepts important to their sexual health, such as use of an external lubricant. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The FSFI and similar questionnaires need to be adapted to broader clinical practice populations such that all persons' experiences are accurately reflected and assessed, ensuring that sexual health needs can be met more inclusively. STRENGTH AND LIMITATIONS: A strength of the study was using cognitive interviews engaging patient perspectives, which is considered the gold standard for establishing content validity. One limitation is that participants included predominantly White and highly educated women.
conclusionFeedback from interviews supports modifying FSFI items and further psychometric testing, and future studies should evaluate the measure among racially and educationally diverse groups.
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.