ArticleSexual medicine2025
Brazilian version of the Brief Male Sexual Function Inventory (BSFI) in adult men: cultural adaptation and measurement properties.
Article in Sexual medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: There is a need for a more comprehensive tool for assessing male sexual function that is inclusive of diverse gender identities and sexual orientations. Aim: Culturally adapt the Brazilian version of the Brief male Sexual Function Inventory (BSFI) and evaluate its measurement properties in adult men. Methods: We conducted an online survey with 727 Brazilian men over 18 years of age (31.73 ± 10.88 years). According to COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN), we translated and evaluated the content validity, structural validity, internal consistency, construct validity, test-retest reliability, measurement error, and minimum and maximum effects of the BSFI. Outcomes: The final Brazilian version of the BSFI consisted of 10 items and was found to be relevant, comprehensive, and comprehensible. Results: Although it showed good content validity and reliability, the BSFI showed inadequate structural validity and insufficient internal consistency for at least one factor. Clinical Implications: The Brazilian version of the BSFI can be used in adult males in community samples, pending evaluation in clinical samples. Strengths and Limitations: The sampling bias associated with online recruitment may have excluded individuals without access to the Internet, thereby compromising the representativeness of the sample. This may limit generalizability. However, COSMIN guidelines were followed to ensure methodological rigor. The BSFI adaptation provides a Patient-Reported Outcome Measure for assessing male sexual function, but has limitations in structural validity and internal consistency. Conclusion: The Brazilian version of the BSFI showed sufficient validity (content validity and hypothesis testing for construct validity) in adult men and sufficient test-retest reliability.
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.