MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Sexual Interest and Desire Inventory—Female (SIDI-F): Item Response Analyses of Data from Women Diagnosed with Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder

2005· article· en· W1684181489 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Sexual Medicine · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsBoehringer Ingelheim (Canada)
FundersBoehringer Ingelheim
KeywordsHypoactive sexual desire disorderSexual desireClinical psychologyRating scaleMoodItem response theoryPsychologyLibidoPlaceboMedicinePsychometricsDevelopmental psychologyAlternative medicineInternal medicineHuman sexuality

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Hypoactive sexual desire disorder (HSDD) is the most common sexual complaint in women. Currently there are no validated instruments for specifically assessing HSDD severity, or change in HSDD severity in response to treatment, in premenopausal women. The Sexual Interest and Desire Inventory-Female (SIDI-F) is a clinician-administered instrument that was developed to measure severity and change in response to treatment of HSDD. Seventeen items were included in a preliminary version of the SIDI-F, including 10 items related to desire, and seven items related to possible comorbid factors (e.g., other kinds of sexual dysfunction, general relationship satisfaction, mood, and fatigue). AIM: The aim of the study was to use the outcome of item response analyses of blinded data from two randomized, placebo-controlled trials, to assist in the revision of the scale. METHODS: A nonparametric item response (IRT) model was used to assess the relation between item functioning and HSDD severity on this preliminary version of the SIDI-F. RESULTS: Results show that the majority of SIDI-F items demonstrated good sensitivity to differences in overall HSDD severity. That is, there was an orderly relation between differences in option selection for an item and differences in overall HSDD severity. The IRT analyses further indicated that revisions were warranted for a number of these items. Five items were not sensitive to differences in HSDD severity and were removed from the scale. CONCLUSION: The SIDI-F is a brief, clinician-administered rating scale designed to assess severity of HSDD symptoms in women. IRT analyses show that majority of the items of the SIDI-F function well in discriminating individual differences in HSDD severity. A revised 13-item version of the SIDI-F is currently undergoing further validation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.471
Threshold uncertainty score0.598

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.224
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.165 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it