CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 182Sexual function and dysfunction studiesSexuality, Behavior, and TechnologySex work and related issues

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Validation of the Decreased Sexual Desire Screener (DSDS): A Brief Diagnostic Instrument for Generalized Acquired Female Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder (HSDD)

Clayton, Anita H., Goldfischer, Evan R., Goldstein, Irwin, DeRogatis, Leonard, Lewis-D’Agostino, Diane J., Pyke, Robert·2009·The Journal of Sexual Medicine
DOI 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2008.01153.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: An accurate diagnosis of Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder (HSDD) currently relies on a time-consuming interview with an expert clinician. Limited access to such expertise means that many women with HSDD remain undiagnosed. The Decreased Sexual Desire Screener (DSDS) was developed to provide clinicians who are neither trained nor specialized in Female Sexual Dysfunction (FSD) with a brief diagnostic procedure for the diagnosis of generalized acquired HSDD in women. METHODS: A prospective non-treatment multicenter study enrolled 263 women at 27 centers in North America in order to test the validity of the DSDS for diagnosing generalized acquired HSDD in women. Subjects completed the DSDS at the screening visit and their answers were reviewed with a clinician who was not an expert in FSD ("non-expert clinician"). Separately and while being unaware of the non-expert clinician's diagnosis, an expert clinician conducted a standard diagnostic interview. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Diagnostic outcomes (generalized acquired HSDD or not) were compared. Primary endpoints included the sensitivity and specificity of the DSDS relative to the standard diagnostic interview. Subject and non-expert clinician debriefing were obtained via a written, structured interview. This ensured that a large sample could be tested under uniform conditions across multiple sites. RESULTS: Diagnostic assessment by DSDS and standard diagnostic interview were in agreement in 85.2% (224/263) of cases, with the sensitivity and specificity of the DSDS 83.6% and 87.8%, respectively. Debriefing showed that the five DSDS questions were well understood by 85.4% (76/89) of subjects included in the debriefing exercise, while non-expert clinicians considered the DSDS questions adequate to diagnose HSDD in 92.9% (235/253) of cases. CONCLUSIONS: The DSDS is a sensitive and specific brief diagnostic instrument for generalized acquired HSDD in women that is quick and easy to use.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2008.01153.x

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Brock, 2002, Sexual problems in mature men and women: Results of a global study, Int J Impot Res, 14, S57
  2. United States Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER), 2000, Draft guidance for industry. Female Sexual Dysfunction: Clinical development of drug products for treatment
  3. Advisory Committee for Reproductive Health Drugs, 2004, United States Food and Drug Administration. Division of Reproductive and Urologic Products. Intrinsa (Testosterone Transdermal System) NDA 21-769: Medical Review

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Clayton, A. H., Goldfischer, E. R., Goldstein, I., DeRogatis, L., Lewis-D’Agostino, D. J., & Pyke, R.
Affiliations
  • University of Virginia (US)
  • Hudson Dermatology (US)
  • Sexual Medicine, Alvarado Hospital , San Diego, CA , USA
  • Sheppard and Enoch Pratt Hospital (US)
  • Boehringer Ingelheim (United States) (US)
Corresponding author
Clayton, Anita H.
ORCID
Venue
The Journal of Sexual Medicine
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2009-03-01
Volume
6
Issue
3
Pages
730-738
ISSN
  • 1743-6095 (ISSN-L)
  • 1743-6109
DOI
10.1111/j.1743-6109.2008.01153.x
OpenAlex
W2076916113
Cited by
182
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 18
FWCI
11.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model (vor)
Locations
  • The Journal of Sexual Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Sexual function and dysfunction studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Sexuality, Behavior, and Technology
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Sex work and related issues
Keywords
hypoactive sexual desire disorder, female sexual dysfunction, screening tool validation, diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity and specificity, women's sexual health
MeSH terms
Adult, Demography, Female, Humans, Libido, Mass Screening, Prospective Studies, Surveys and Questionnaires, Sensitivity and Specificity, Severity of Illness Index, Sexual Behavior, Reproducibility of Results, Cross-Over Studies, Sexual Dysfunctions, Psychological, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders

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