Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Review of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Sexual Dysfunction

  • Male Sexual Dysfunction and Disorders (SE Althof and AW Pastuszak, Section Editors)
  • Published:
Current Sexual Health Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Recently, the high prevalence of sexual dysfunctions in our society has become a topic of public awareness and has encouraged a substantial interest in the media and on the part of the pharmaceutical industry in the field of sexual functioning. This attention has resulted in an expansion in the development of measures of sexual function/dysfunction for use as outcome measures in clinical drug trials. The instruments tend to be brief self-report inventories, typically requiring no more than 20 min of respondent time for completion. All of these instruments must adhere to recently prescribed rigorous guidelines set forth by the FDA and be valid and reliable indicators of the sexual function constructs they purport to measure. The constructs that provide the framework of our diagnostic system for sexual dysfunctions are not amenable to direct physical measurement, so that they must be assessed via patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures. Although not as precise as physical measures, these psychological instruments do a capable job of quantifying and representing sexual functioning status in a concise and rigorous manner and have become indispensable tools in our clinical and research programs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. DuBois PH. A history of psychological testing. Boston: Allyn & Bacon; 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Galton F. Inquiries into human faculty and its development. New York: MacMillan; 1883.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  3. Cattell JM. Mental tests and measurements. Mind. 1890;15:373–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Kempf, E. J. The behavior chart in mental diseases. American Journal of Insanity, 1914–1915; 7: 761–772.

  5. Woodworth RS. Personal data sheet. Chicago: Stoelting; 1918.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Laumann EO, Paik A, Rosen RC. Sexual dysfunction in the United States: Prevalence and predictors. J Am Med Assoc. 1999;281:537–44.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER). February,. Guidance for industry patient-reported outcomes measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims. Rockville, MD: Author. 2009.

  8. Davis, C. M., Yarber, W. L., Bauserman, R., Schreer, G., & Davis, S. (Eds.). Handbook of sexuality-related measures. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage Publications, Inc; 1998.

  9. World Health Organization. ICD-10: International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems. Geneva: Author; 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  10. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington: Author; 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Masters WH, Johnson VE. Human sexual response. Boston: Little Brown; 1966.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Masters WH, Johnson VE. Human sexual inadequacy. Boston: Little Brown; 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Kaplan HS. Disorders of sexual desire. New York: Brunner/Mazel; 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Derogatis LR, Burnett AL. Key methodologic issues in sexual medicine research. J Sex Med. 2007;4:427–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Utian WH, MacLean DB, Symonds T, Symons J, Somayji V, Sission M. A methodology study to validate a structured diagnostic method used to diagnose female sexual dysfunction and its subtypes in post-menopausal women. J Sex Mar Ther. 2005;31:271–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Derogatis LR, Culpepper WJ. Psychological tests in screening for psychiatric disorders. In: Maruish M, editor. The use of psychological testing for outcomes assessment and treatment planning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Nunnally J. Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  18. McGahuey CA, Gelenberg AJ, Laukes CA, Moreno FA, Delgado PL. The Arizona sexual experience scale (ASEX): Reliability and validity. J Sex Mar Ther. 2000;26(25):25–40.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Derogatis LR. The Derogatis Interview for Sexual Functioning (DISF, DISF-SR): An introductory report. J Sex Mar Ther. 1997;23(1):291–304.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Kalantaridou SN, Vanderhoof J, Calis KA, Corrigan EC, Troendle JF, Nelson LM. Sexual function in young women with spontaneous 46, XX primary ovarian insufficiency. Fertil Steril. 2008;5:1805–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Wong FL, Francisco L, Togwa K, Kim H, Bosworth A, Atencio L, et al. Longitudinal trajectory of sexual functioning after hematopoietic cell transplantation. Blood. 2013;122:3973–81.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Rosen R, Brown C, Heiman J, Leiblum S, Meston C, Shabsigh R, et al. The Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI): A multidimensional self-report instrument for the assessment of female sexual function. J Sex Mar Ther. 2000;26:191–208.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Meston CM. Validation of the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) in a women with female orgasmic disorder and women with hypoactive sexual desire disorder. J Sex Mar Ther. 2003;29:39–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Revicki DA, Margolis MA, Bush EN, Derogatis LR, Hanes V. Content validity of the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) in pre- and postmenopausal women with hypoactive sexual desire disorder. J Sex Med. 2011;8:2237–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Gerstenberger EP, Rosen RC, Brewer JV, Meston CM, Brotto LA, Wiegel M, et al. Sexual desire and the female sexual function index: A sexual desire cutpoint for clinical interpretation of the FSFI in women with and without hypoactive sexual desire disorder. J Sex Med. 2010;7:3929–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Althof S, Rosen R, Symonds T, Mundayat R, May K, Abraham L. Development and validation of a new questionnaire to assess sexual satisfaction, control, and distress associated with premature ejaculation. J Sex Med. 2006;3:465–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Althof, S, McMahon, CG, Waldinger, MD, Serefoglu, EC, Shindel, AW, Adaikan, PG, Becher,E, Dean, J, Giulano, F, Hellstrom, W, Giraldi, A, Glina, S, Incrocci, L, Jannini, E, McCabe, M, Parish, S. Rowland, D, Segraves, RT, Sharlip, I, Torres, LO. An update of the International Society of Sexual Medicine’s Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Premature Ejaculation (PE).Sex Med, 201; 2:60–90.

  28. Rosen RC, Riley A, Wagner G, Osterloh IH, Kirkpatrick J, Mishra A. The International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF): A multidimensional scale for assessment of erectile dysfunction. Urology. 1997;49:822–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Rosen RC, Cappelleri JC, Gendrano III N. The International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF): A state-of-the-science review. Int J Impot Res. 2002;14:226–44.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Rosen RC, Allen KR, Ni X, Araujo AB. Mininally clinically important differences in the erectile function domain of the International Index of Erectile Function Scale (IIEF). Eur Urol. 2011;60:1010–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Yang M, Ni X, Sontag A, Litman HJ, Rosen RC. Nonresponders, partial responders, and complete responders to PDE5 inhibitor therapy according to IIEF criteria: validation of an anchor-based treatment responder classification. J Sex Med. 2013;10:3029–37.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Derogatis LR, Rust J, Golombok S, Davis S, Bouchard N, Rodenberg C, et al. Validation of the profile of female sexual function (PFSF) in surgically and naturally menopausal women. J Sex Mar Ther. 2004;30:25–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. McHorney CA, Rust J, Golombok S, Davis S, Bouchard C, Brown C, et al. Profiles of Female Sexual Function: a patient-based, international, psychometric instrument for the assessment of hypoactive sexual desire in oophorectomized women. Menopause. 2004;11:1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Golombok S, Derogatis L, Rodenberg C, Koochaki P, Schmitt S. Rust J Development and Validation of a New Screening Tool for Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder: the Brief Profile of Female Sexual Function© (B-PFSF©). Gynecol Endocrinol. 2007;23:455–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Quirk FH, Heiman JR, Rosen RC, Laan E, Smith MD, Boolell M. Development of a sexual function questionnaire for clinical trials of female sexual dysfunction. J Wmn’s Hlth Gend-Bas Med. 2002;11:277–85.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Symonds T, Abraham L, Bushmakin AG, Williams K, Martin M, Cappelleri C. Sexual Function Questionnaire: Further refinement and validation. J Sex Med. 2012;9:2609–16.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Sills T, Wunderlich G, Pyke R, Segraves RT, Leiblum S, Clayton A, et al. The Sexual Interest and Desire Inventory – Female (SIDI-F): Item response analysis of data from women diagnosed with Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder. J Sex Med. 2005;2:801–18.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Clayton AH, Segraves RT, Leiblum S, Basson R, Pyke R, Cotton D, et al. Relaibility and validity of the Sexual Interest and Desire Inventory-Female (SIDI-F) a scale designed to measure severity of female hypoactive sexual desire disorder. J Sex Mar Ther. 2006;32:115–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Derogatis LR, Rosen R, Leiblum S, Burnett A, Heiman J. The Female Sexual Distress Scale (FSDS): Initial validation of a standardized scale for assessment of sexually related personal distress in women. J Sex Mar Ther. 2002;28:317–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Derogatis LR, Clayton A, Lewis-D’Agostino D, Wunderlich G, Fu Y. Validation of the Female Sexual Distress Scale Revised for assessing distress in women with hypoactive sexual desire disorder. J Sex Med. 2008;5:357–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Derogatis LR, Pyke R, McCormack J, Hunter A, Harding G. Does the Female Sexual Distress Scale Revised cover the feelings of women with HSDD? J Sex Med. 2011;8:2810–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Althof S, Rosen R, Derogatis LR, Corty E, Quirk F, Symonds T. Outcomes measurement in female sexual dysfunction clinical trials: Review and recommendations. J Sex Mar Ther. 2005;31:153–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Compliance with Ethics Guidelines

Conflict of Interest

Leonard R. Derogatis declares no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by the author.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Maryland Center for Sexual Health, Department of Psychiatry, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 1300 York Rd. Suite 130, Bldg. A, Baltimore, MD, USA

    Leonard R. Derogatis

Authors
  1. Leonard R. Derogatis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Leonard R. Derogatis.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Male Sexual Dysfunction and Disorders

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Derogatis, L.R. Review of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Sexual Dysfunction. Curr Sex Health Rep 7, 151–158 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11930-015-0052-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11930-015-0052-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation