ArticleFrontiers in reproductive health2026
Female sexual dysfunction among foreign and Australian-born women: a cross-sectional study.
Article in Frontiers in reproductive health, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Female sexual dysfunction (FSD) affects a substantial proportion of reproductive-aged women (15-49 years) globally, yet little is known about how migration shapes sexual function. This study compares and describes the patterns of FSD among foreign-born and Australian-born women residing in Australia. Methods: This cross-sectional study recruited women through an online survey using a convenience sampling approach with equal recruitment targets for foreign-born and Australian-born women. FSD was assessed using the validated Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI), with dysfunction defined as a total score of 26.55 or below. Patterns of FSD were compared between groups and stratified by sociodemographic characteristics. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to compare FSD among overseas-born women with Australian born women, controlling for age, education, marital status, religion, area-level socioeconomic position, and gravidity. Results: A total of 678 women were included in the final analysis (342 Australian-born, 336 foreign-born). About 47.1% (95% CI: 41.7-52.5) Australian-born and 46.1% (95% CI: 40.7-51.6) foreign-born participants had FSD. Mean FSFI total scores were nearly identical (Australian-born: 26.35 ± 5.72, 95% CI: 25.74-26.95; foreign-born: 26.41 ± 5.69, 95% CI: 25.80-27.03; Conclusions: FSD affected 46.6% of survey participants overall. Future longitudinal research is needed to build a more complete understanding of sexual health equity across diverse populations.
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.