ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Reliability and structural validity of the Female Sexual Function Index in Spanish female university students.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) is a questionnaire designed to assess sexual response in women and is widely used in both research and clinical settings. A systematic review has questioned the reliability of the instrument. The aim of the present study was to examine the reliability and factor structure of the questionnaire in Spanish female university students. Methodology: The sample consisted of 263 female university students, with a mean age of 22.67 years (SD = 6.08). The original 19-item version of the Female Sexual Function Index was used. The questionnaire assesses six different domains: Sexual desire, arousal, lubrication, orgasm, satisfaction, and pain. Results: Item analysis showed that item-total correlations ranged from 0.498 to 0.921. The reliability of the questionnaire, assessed using Cronbach's alpha, was 0.975, while the reliability coefficients for each of the scales ranged from 0.803 to 0.972. The statistical indicators used to assess the suitability of conducting factor analysis were satisfactory. Finally, the confirmatory factor analysis indices indicated a good fit of the questionnaire to the six-factor structure of the original model. Discussion: The results indicate that the FSFI demonstrates good psychometric properties, supporting its use in both research and clinical settings. Future studies are recommended to replicate the validation to verify the continued validity of the instrument, as well as its adaptation to the updated criteria of the main diagnostic manuals.
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.