The Sex Effects Scale: Pilot Validation in a Healthy Population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Sexual dysfunction is frequently associated with depression and is often exacerbated by antidepressant treatment. The true prevalence of antidepressant minduced dysfunction during a major depressive episode is generally underreported, due to reliance on spontaneous self-report data and the reluctance of physicians to use standardized rating scales. The aim of this study is to validate the Sex Effects scale (SexFX) in a healthy population, addressing internal and inter-rater reliability, test-retest reliability, as well as convergent and divergent validity. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The SexFX is a 13-item scale that assesses severity of sexual dysfunction across the domains of desire, arousal, and orgasm based on the frequency of behaviour. Healthy participants (N = 53) had the SexFX and Changes in Sexual Functioning Questionnaire (CSFQ) administered at two timepoints, two weeks apart. RESULTS: The Cronbach's a was 0.91 and 0.93 for the male and female scales, respectively, and inter-rater reliability was very high with ICCs of 0.99 for both the male and female scales. Concurrent validity with the CSFQ was adequate. CONCLUSION: The SexFX demonstrated satisfactory psychometric properties, providing the results necessary to proceed with further validation trials.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".