ArticleBMC psychology2025
Development and validation of the sexual distress scale: results from a collectivistic culture.
Article in BMC psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sexual Frustration and Sexual Assault Among Higher Education Students in France.Archives of sexual behavior · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLiterature lacks a comprehensive measure of sexual distress that could be applied to both clinical and non-clinical populations, regardless of the gender and relational status of the respondents. The current study, therefore, developed and validated Sexual Distress Scale (SDS).
methodThe development and validation of the SDS involved two consecutive studies with a total of 656 participants (men = 300, women = 356; M
resultsThe SDS demonstrated high reliability in both the studies (α = 0.911 & 0.946). Item-total correlations ranged from 0.670 to 0.878 (p < 0.01). EFA revealed a single-factor structure consisting of 8 items. CFA confirmed this structure, projecting a good comparative fit index (CFI = 0.913). The scale's convergent validity was established through significant positive correlations with depression (r = 0.845, p < 0.01), anxiety (r = 0.847, p < 0.01), and stress (r = 0.786, p < 0.01). Divergent validity was established through significant inverse correlations with life satisfaction (r = -0.972, p < 0.01) and emotional expressivity (r= -0.935, p < 0.01). Compared to women, men experienced significantly higher levels of sexual distress (p < 0.01; Cohen's d = 0.448).
conclusionThe study bridges a substantial knowledge gap in the measurement of sexual distress. The findings highlight the impact of sexual distress on psychosocial health. The study opens avenues for further research and targeted interventions in sexuality, especially within the collectivistic cultures.
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.