MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220896175 · doi:10.1016/j.jsxm.2022.02.026

Psychometric Validation of the Sexual Distress Scale in Male and Female Portuguese Samples

2022· article· en· W4220896175 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 · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsCape Breton University
FundersFundação para a Ciência e a TecnologiaPrograma Operacional Temático Factores de Competitividade
KeywordsDistressSexual functionPsychologyPortugueseClinical psychologyQuality of life (healthcare)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The Female Sexual Distress Scale and the Female Sexual Distress Scale-Revised-herein called the Sexual Distress Scale (SDS and SDS-R)-are among the most widely used self-report instruments to assess sexual distress, but no version for use in the Portuguese population is available to date. AIM: The current study aimed to validate the Portuguese version of the SDS/SDS-R in samples of women and men with and without distressing sexual problems. METHODS: A sample of 1,109 participants without distressing sexual problems (761 women) and 382 participants with distressing sexual problems (283 women), ages ranging from 18 to 72 years, were used to examine the psychometric properties of the Portuguese SDS and SDS-R. OUTCOMES: Participants completed a survey that included a sociodemographic and health questionnaire, the Portuguese version of the SDS and SDS-R, and measures of sexual satisfaction, sexual quality of life, sexual function, dyadic adjustment, and psychological distress. RESULTS: Results indicated that the Portuguese SDS and the SDS-R assess 1 general domain of sexual distress and showed good evidences of validity based on content and on relations with other variables. Sexual distress was associated with poorer sexual function, satisfaction, and quality of life, with higher psychological distress, and lower dyadic adjustment. Internal consistency and test-retest (1 month) reliabilities were excellent. Tests of differential functioning of items indicated that the SDS and SDS-R scores can be used to compare women and men on sexual distress, but the SDS/SDS-R scores flagged differential functioning of items and test (DFIT) between participants with and without distressing sexual problems. CLINICAL TRANSLATION: Clinicians and researchers can now make use of the SDS and of the SDS-R in the Portuguese population, facilitating the assessment of sexual distress in clinical settings. STRENGTHS & LIMITATIONS: The Portuguese SDS/SDS-R scores can be compared between women and men, providing information on sexual distress independently of sexual function. With the current evidence, comparisons between individuals with and without distressing sexual problems should be made with caution, as the scores may be biased against the former. CONCLUSION: This study provides a validation of the Portuguese version of the SDS/SDS-R that can be used to assess sexual distress in Portuguese women and men and can be used to compare between these 2 groups. Tavares IM, Santos-Iglesias P, Nobre PJ. Psychometric Validation of the Sexual Distress Scale in Male and Female Portuguese Samples. J Sex Med 2022;19:834-845.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.677

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.252 · 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