Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 256

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 23 of the 23 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Development of a Sexual Function Questionnaire for Clinical Trials of Female Sexual Dysfunction

Open access
Quirk, Frances H., Heiman, Julia R., Rosen, Raymond C., Laan, Ellen, Smith, Michael D., Boolell, Mitra·2002·Journal of Women's Health & Gender-Based Medicine

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To better evaluate efficacy in clinical trials of drugs as potential treatments for female sexual dysfunctions (FSD), a brief, multidimensional measure of female sexual function was developed. METHODS: Data from semistructured interviews with 82 women with or without FSD, aged 19-65 years, generated a pool of 61 items that addressed aspects of female sexual function. On review by a panel, individual items were selected for face validity and clinical relevance. Thirty-one items were used as a sexual function questionnaire (SFQ-V1) in two multicenter, phase II clinical trials totaling 781 women with FSD. Normative data were generated from a sample of 201 women without FSD. RESULTS: Factor analysis produced seven domains of female sexual function: desire, physical arousal-sensation, physical arousal-lubrication, enjoyment, orgasm, pain, and partner relationship. The internal consistency of the domains ranged from 0.65 to 0.91, and test-retest reliability ranged from 0.21 to 0.71 for Cohen's weighted kappa and 0.42 to 0.78 for Pearson's correlation coefficient. There was a significant difference between the baseline mean SFQ domain scores of patients with FSD compared with those of women without FSD (p < 0.0001). End-of-study SFQ scores were significantly different for women who reported improvement vs. women who reported no improvement (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The SFQ produced seven domains of female sexual function with excellent internal consistency, moderate to good reliability, excellent discriminant validity, and sensitivity. The results suggest that the SFQ may be a valuable new tool for evaluating and diagnosing subsets of FSD and, ultimately, for evaluating treatments of these disorders.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1089/152460902753668475

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 23 references

Cited by

See all 256

Metadata

Authors
Quirk, F. H., Heiman, J. R., Rosen, R. C., Laan, E., Smith, M. D., & Boolell, M.
Venue
Journal of Women's Health & Gender-Based Medicine
Published
2002-04
Volume
11
Issue
3
Pages
277-289
ISSN
1524-6094 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2172679188
Cited by
256
References
23
FWCI
5.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Development of a Sexual Function Questionnaire for Clinical Trials of Female Sexual Dysfunction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1089/152460902753668475
The paper
Quirk, F. H., Heiman, J. R., Rosen, R. C., Laan, E., Smith, M. D., & Boolell, M. (2002). Development of a Sexual Function Questionnaire for Clinical Trials of Female Sexual Dysfunction. Journal of Women's Health & Gender-Based Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1089/152460902753668475

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.