Orgasm Rating Scale and Bodily Sensations of Orgasm Scale: Validation for Use with Pre, Peri, and Post-Menopausal Women
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Orgasm, particularly in older women, remains a poorly understood aspect of female sexual response partly because of a lack of validated self-report measures. AIM: To evaluate the Orgasm Rating Scale (ORS) and Bodily Sensations of Orgasm Scale (BSOS) for use with pre, peri, and post-menopausal women and between solitary and partnered orgasm contexts. METHODS: Participants (solitary context, 252 pre, 139 peri, 190 post; partnered context, 229 pre, 136 peri, and 194 post-menopausal women, aged 18-82 years) were asked to complete an online questionnaire based on most recent solitary and partnered orgasm. Principal components analysis with Varimax rotation summarized the data into interpretable baseline models for all groups. Multi-Group Confirmatory Factor Analysis tested for multi-group measurement invariance. Adjustments to the models were made, and final model structures were presented. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: ORS and BSOS measuring solitary and/or masturbation and partnered orgasm. RESULTS: For the ORS, 10 factor solutions were preferred, explaining 81% (pre), 80% (peri), and 81% (post) of the variance for the solitary and 83% (pre), 86% (peri), and 84% (post) of the variance for the partnered context. Factors included pleasurable satisfaction, ecstasy, emotional intimacy, relaxation, building sensations, flooding sensations, flushing sensations, shooting sensations, throbbing sensations, and general spasms. For the BSOS, 3 factor solutions were preferred, explaining 55% (pre), 60% (peri), and 56% (post) of the variance for the solitary and 56% (pre), 61% (peri), and 60% (post) of the variance for the partnered context. Factors included extragenital sensations, genital sensations and spasms, and nociceptive sensations and sweating responses. Divergent validity was observed (solitary r = -.04; partnered r = -.11) and configural, metric and scalar invariance for the solitary and partnered versions of the ORS and BSOS were found, suggesting the measures were interpreted similarly by all women. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: With valid measurement tools, women's varying orgasm experiences can be investigated more systematically and compared to address gaps and conflicts in the existing literature. Ultimately, these additions may assist with improved interventions for women who are unsatisfied with their orgasm experiences. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS: Strengths include gaining the ability to compare age and menopausal status groups using empirically validated measures of orgasm experience. Limitations include cross-sectional design and lack of test-retest reliability measurement. CONCLUSION: The ORS and BSOS are supported for use with women across adulthood in solitary and partnered orgasm contexts and can be used concurrently to provide a comprehensive assessment. Webb AE, Reissing ED, Huta V. Orgasm Rating Scale and Bodily Sensations of Orgasm Scale: Validation for Use With Pre, Peri, and Post-Menopausal Women. J Sex Med 2022;19:1156-1172.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».