Psychometric Properties of the Persian version of the Compulsive Sexual Behavior Disorder Scale (CSBD-19)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conducting studies in the field of Compulsive Sexual Behavior Disorder (CSBD) has mostly been limited to Western cultures, and disagreements regarding the definition and assessment of this disorder are still debated. This study aims to examine the validity and Reliability of the Persian version of the Compulsive Sexual Behavior Disorder Scale (CSBD-19). We conducted this cross-sectional online study from April to July 2022 among 200 Iranian women and men (100 women, Mage (SD)* = 38.5 years(12/79), 100 males, Mage (SD) = 48.5 years (16/26)). After back-to-back translations, we examined the Face, Content, and Construct Validity, Reliability, and Confirmatory Factor Analysis. The results indicated excellent Face validity (impact score >1.5 for all items), Content validity (CVI > 0.79), Reliability (Cronbach’s alpha ≥ 0.95, CI = 95% (0.92-0.98)). The pre-established five-factor model of the CSBD-19 (i.e., control, salience, relapse, dissatisfaction, and negative consequences) had an excellent fit to the data and demonstrated appropriate associations with the correlates. The Persian version of the CSBD-19 is a valid and reliable scale based on the ICD-11 definition of CSBD that may identify people at high risk for CSBD. This tool can apply in large sample size studies, and in a traditional context, such as Islamic countries. Mean (Standard Deviation)*
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".