The female sexual function index (FSFI) and the female sexual distress scale (FSDS): psychometric properties within a Dutch population
Abstract
The aim of the present study was to investigate the psychometric properties of the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI; Rosen et al., 2000) and the Female Sexual Distress Scale (FSDS; Derogatis, Rosen, Leiblum, Burnett, & Heiman, 2002) within a Dutch population of approximately 350 women with and without sexual complaints. The main conclusions of this study are that the multidimensional structure of the FSFI and the unidimensional structure of the FSDS are fairly well replicated in a Dutch sample. The amount of variance explained by confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses was good. Internal consistency and stability of the FSFI and its subscales and the FSDS are satisfactory to good, and the subscales are reasonably stable across demographic variables. The discriminant validity and the ability of the scales to predict the presence or absence of sexual complaints was excellent. The convergent and divergent construct validity of the FSFI and the FSDS was good. These results support the reliability and psychometric validity of the FSFI and the FSDS in the assessment of dimensions of female sexual functioning and sexual distress in clinical and nonclinical samples.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
FSFI has appropriate test-retest reliability and satisfactory to good internal consistency.
“Test-retest reliability has appropriate level of stability, while the internal consistency of the instrument and its subscales are satisfactory to good (Ter Kuile et al., 2006).”
From Internet-based treatment for vulvodynia (EMBLA) – Study protocol for a randomised controlled study (2021) · cites this paper as Ter Kuile et al., 2006
FSFI's ability to predict the presence or absence of sexual complaints is excellent.
“The ability of the scale to predict the presence or absence of sexual complaints is considered excellent (Ter Kuile et al., 2006).”
From Internet-based treatment for vulvodynia (EMBLA) – Study protocol for a randomised controlled study (2021) · cites this paper as Ter Kuile et al., 2006
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 24 · Cited by 308
- Authors
- Ter Kuile, M. M., Brauer, M., & Laan, E.
- Affiliations
- Leiden University Medical Center (NL)
- Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam (NL)
- Venue
- Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2006-09
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 289-304
- ISSN
- 0092-623X (ISSN-L)
- 1521-0715
- OpenAlex
- W2115442534
- Cited by
- 308
- References
- 24
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 22
- FWCI
- 8.52
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
- Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Sexual function and dysfunction studies
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Sexuality, Behavior, and Technology
- Keywords
- Female Sexual Function Index, Female Sexual Distress Scale, female sexual dysfunction, sexual distress, psychometric validation, factor structure, internal consistency, construct validity, discriminant validity, Dutch women, sexual complaints
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Arousal, Female, Humans, Middle Aged, Netherlands, Psychometrics, Surveys and Questionnaires, Self-Assessment, Sensitivity and Specificity, Severity of Illness Index, Sexual Dysfunction, Physiological, Reproducibility of Results, Women's Health, Sexual Dysfunctions, Psychological
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
