Consistency of three different questionnaires for evaluating sexual function in healthy young women
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2018 |
Outros Autores: | , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Institucional da UFRN |
Texto Completo: | https://repositorio.ufrn.br/jspui/handle/123456789/26431 |
Resumo: | BACKGROUND: Most studies on female sexual dysfunction are performed in population inventories and under specific clinical conditions. These approaches are performed using validated psychometric scales. Different scales to assess sexual function use different numbers of questions to characterize their domains. They also may or may not include domains of interaction between sexual partners. The objective of this study was to compare the precision between scales to be able to analyze their accuracy for better diagnosis of sexual dysfunction. METHODS: Fifty (50) healthy young women were enrolled in this study. Three questionnaires (FSFI, SQ-F, and GRISS) were applied to assess sexual function (n = 44). The accuracy measured by the area under the ROC curve (AUC) for individual domains and to cross-validated pairwise comparison of the three analyzed instruments was used. Kruskall-Wallis test to analyze individual domains of the scales was also used.The P-value was established as 0.05. RESULTS: The results showed that all domains and total FSFI and GRISS scores were significantly different between normal and dysfunctional women, but not for SQ-F domains. Indeed, AUC accuracy varied from excellent-good domain discrimination for FSFI and GRISS, but fair-poor for SQ-F. For the paired comparison between the three questionnaires a fair accuracy was detected. The specificity percentage was around 84% whereas that for sensibility was low, around 30%. CONCLUSIONS: The best agreement was between FSFI and SQ-F, probably being related to high similar shared questions when compared to GRISS. The agreement between SQ-F and GRISS was low possible due to low number of questions in SQ-F to characterize similar domains. This study evidenced high agreement between scales to sensitivity and low agreement for specificity, thereby conferring fair accuracy between them. Thus, the limited grade for discriminatory capacity (AUC) for sexual response should be considered when comparing results from these three different questionnaires and also when comparing with other different scales. In addition, despite the diversity of scales, the high reliability and fit for their desire domain suggest that the FSFI scale has good accuracy for the current clinical assessment of women's sexual health. |
id |
UFRN_bed9ee642c1999ef8a8db9ad7f080d84 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:https://repositorio.ufrn.br:123456789/26431 |
network_acronym_str |
UFRN |
network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional da UFRN |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Costa, Christiane Kelen Lucena daSpyrides, Maria Helena ConstantinoSousa, Maria Bernardete Cordeiro de2019-01-08T17:13:17Z2019-01-08T17:13:17Z2018-12-20COSTA, C. K. L.; SPYRIDES, M. H. C.; SOUSA, M. B. C. Consistency of three different questionnaires for evaluating sexual function in healthy young women. BMC Womens Health, v. 18, n. 1, p. 204, dez. 2018. doi: 10.1186/s12905-018-0693-yhttps://repositorio.ufrn.br/jspui/handle/123456789/2643110.1186/s12905-018-0693-yengCouple relationshipsfemale sexual functionprimary diagnosis of dysfunctionpsychometric scales accuracyConsistency of three different questionnaires for evaluating sexual function in healthy young womeninfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleBACKGROUND: Most studies on female sexual dysfunction are performed in population inventories and under specific clinical conditions. These approaches are performed using validated psychometric scales. Different scales to assess sexual function use different numbers of questions to characterize their domains. They also may or may not include domains of interaction between sexual partners. The objective of this study was to compare the precision between scales to be able to analyze their accuracy for better diagnosis of sexual dysfunction. METHODS: Fifty (50) healthy young women were enrolled in this study. Three questionnaires (FSFI, SQ-F, and GRISS) were applied to assess sexual function (n = 44). The accuracy measured by the area under the ROC curve (AUC) for individual domains and to cross-validated pairwise comparison of the three analyzed instruments was used. Kruskall-Wallis test to analyze individual domains of the scales was also used.The P-value was established as 0.05. RESULTS: The results showed that all domains and total FSFI and GRISS scores were significantly different between normal and dysfunctional women, but not for SQ-F domains. Indeed, AUC accuracy varied from excellent-good domain discrimination for FSFI and GRISS, but fair-poor for SQ-F. For the paired comparison between the three questionnaires a fair accuracy was detected. The specificity percentage was around 84% whereas that for sensibility was low, around 30%. CONCLUSIONS: The best agreement was between FSFI and SQ-F, probably being related to high similar shared questions when compared to GRISS. The agreement between SQ-F and GRISS was low possible due to low number of questions in SQ-F to characterize similar domains. This study evidenced high agreement between scales to sensitivity and low agreement for specificity, thereby conferring fair accuracy between them. Thus, the limited grade for discriminatory capacity (AUC) for sexual response should be considered when comparing results from these three different questionnaires and also when comparing with other different scales. In addition, despite the diversity of scales, the high reliability and fit for their desire domain suggest that the FSFI scale has good accuracy for the current clinical assessment of women's sexual health.info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Institucional da UFRNinstname:Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN)instacron:UFRNTEXTBernardeteSousa_ICe_2018_Consistency of three different.pdf.txtBernardeteSousa_ICe_2018_Consistency of three different.pdf.txtExtracted texttext/plain39613https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/26431/3/BernardeteSousa_ICe_2018_Consistency%20of%20three%20different.pdf.txt0622cd6e6d7dbb46a1a4e6573ace9d8eMD53THUMBNAILBernardeteSousa_ICe_2018_Consistency of three different.pdf.jpgBernardeteSousa_ICe_2018_Consistency of three different.pdf.jpgIM Thumbnailimage/jpeg8247https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/26431/4/BernardeteSousa_ICe_2018_Consistency%20of%20three%20different.pdf.jpg2507caba2ea447efd7734ade97dc719eMD54ORIGINALBernardeteSousa_ICe_2018_Consistency of three different.pdfBernardeteSousa_ICe_2018_Consistency of three different.pdfBernardeteSousa_ICe_2018_Consistency of three differentapplication/pdf954627https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/26431/1/BernardeteSousa_ICe_2018_Consistency%20of%20three%20different.pdff333843151a3975012a407de8563328fMD51LICENSElicense.txtlicense.txttext/plain; charset=utf-81748https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/26431/2/license.txt8a4605be74aa9ea9d79846c1fba20a33MD52123456789/264312019-01-30 09:33:04.115oai:https://repositorio.ufrn.br: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Repositório de PublicaçõesPUBhttp://repositorio.ufrn.br/oai/opendoar:2019-01-30T12:33:04Repositório Institucional da UFRN - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN)false |
dc.title.pt_BR.fl_str_mv |
Consistency of three different questionnaires for evaluating sexual function in healthy young women |
title |
Consistency of three different questionnaires for evaluating sexual function in healthy young women |
spellingShingle |
Consistency of three different questionnaires for evaluating sexual function in healthy young women Costa, Christiane Kelen Lucena da Couple relationships female sexual function primary diagnosis of dysfunction psychometric scales accuracy |
title_short |
Consistency of three different questionnaires for evaluating sexual function in healthy young women |
title_full |
Consistency of three different questionnaires for evaluating sexual function in healthy young women |
title_fullStr |
Consistency of three different questionnaires for evaluating sexual function in healthy young women |
title_full_unstemmed |
Consistency of three different questionnaires for evaluating sexual function in healthy young women |
title_sort |
Consistency of three different questionnaires for evaluating sexual function in healthy young women |
author |
Costa, Christiane Kelen Lucena da |
author_facet |
Costa, Christiane Kelen Lucena da Spyrides, Maria Helena Constantino Sousa, Maria Bernardete Cordeiro de |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Spyrides, Maria Helena Constantino Sousa, Maria Bernardete Cordeiro de |
author2_role |
author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Costa, Christiane Kelen Lucena da Spyrides, Maria Helena Constantino Sousa, Maria Bernardete Cordeiro de |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Couple relationships female sexual function primary diagnosis of dysfunction psychometric scales accuracy |
topic |
Couple relationships female sexual function primary diagnosis of dysfunction psychometric scales accuracy |
description |
BACKGROUND: Most studies on female sexual dysfunction are performed in population inventories and under specific clinical conditions. These approaches are performed using validated psychometric scales. Different scales to assess sexual function use different numbers of questions to characterize their domains. They also may or may not include domains of interaction between sexual partners. The objective of this study was to compare the precision between scales to be able to analyze their accuracy for better diagnosis of sexual dysfunction. METHODS: Fifty (50) healthy young women were enrolled in this study. Three questionnaires (FSFI, SQ-F, and GRISS) were applied to assess sexual function (n = 44). The accuracy measured by the area under the ROC curve (AUC) for individual domains and to cross-validated pairwise comparison of the three analyzed instruments was used. Kruskall-Wallis test to analyze individual domains of the scales was also used.The P-value was established as 0.05. RESULTS: The results showed that all domains and total FSFI and GRISS scores were significantly different between normal and dysfunctional women, but not for SQ-F domains. Indeed, AUC accuracy varied from excellent-good domain discrimination for FSFI and GRISS, but fair-poor for SQ-F. For the paired comparison between the three questionnaires a fair accuracy was detected. The specificity percentage was around 84% whereas that for sensibility was low, around 30%. CONCLUSIONS: The best agreement was between FSFI and SQ-F, probably being related to high similar shared questions when compared to GRISS. The agreement between SQ-F and GRISS was low possible due to low number of questions in SQ-F to characterize similar domains. This study evidenced high agreement between scales to sensitivity and low agreement for specificity, thereby conferring fair accuracy between them. Thus, the limited grade for discriminatory capacity (AUC) for sexual response should be considered when comparing results from these three different questionnaires and also when comparing with other different scales. In addition, despite the diversity of scales, the high reliability and fit for their desire domain suggest that the FSFI scale has good accuracy for the current clinical assessment of women's sexual health. |
publishDate |
2018 |
dc.date.issued.fl_str_mv |
2018-12-20 |
dc.date.accessioned.fl_str_mv |
2019-01-08T17:13:17Z |
dc.date.available.fl_str_mv |
2019-01-08T17:13:17Z |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.citation.fl_str_mv |
COSTA, C. K. L.; SPYRIDES, M. H. C.; SOUSA, M. B. C. Consistency of three different questionnaires for evaluating sexual function in healthy young women. BMC Womens Health, v. 18, n. 1, p. 204, dez. 2018. doi: 10.1186/s12905-018-0693-y |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://repositorio.ufrn.br/jspui/handle/123456789/26431 |
dc.identifier.doi.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1186/s12905-018-0693-y |
identifier_str_mv |
COSTA, C. K. L.; SPYRIDES, M. H. C.; SOUSA, M. B. C. Consistency of three different questionnaires for evaluating sexual function in healthy young women. BMC Womens Health, v. 18, n. 1, p. 204, dez. 2018. doi: 10.1186/s12905-018-0693-y 10.1186/s12905-018-0693-y |
url |
https://repositorio.ufrn.br/jspui/handle/123456789/26431 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositório Institucional da UFRN instname:Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN) instacron:UFRN |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN) |
instacron_str |
UFRN |
institution |
UFRN |
reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional da UFRN |
collection |
Repositório Institucional da UFRN |
bitstream.url.fl_str_mv |
https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/26431/3/BernardeteSousa_ICe_2018_Consistency%20of%20three%20different.pdf.txt https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/26431/4/BernardeteSousa_ICe_2018_Consistency%20of%20three%20different.pdf.jpg https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/26431/1/BernardeteSousa_ICe_2018_Consistency%20of%20three%20different.pdf https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/26431/2/license.txt |
bitstream.checksum.fl_str_mv |
0622cd6e6d7dbb46a1a4e6573ace9d8e 2507caba2ea447efd7734ade97dc719e f333843151a3975012a407de8563328f 8a4605be74aa9ea9d79846c1fba20a33 |
bitstream.checksumAlgorithm.fl_str_mv |
MD5 MD5 MD5 MD5 |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Institucional da UFRN - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1802117819132805120 |