CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 110Sexual function and dysfunction studiesSexuality, Behavior, and TechnologySex work and related issues

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 68 of the 69 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Efficacy of Psychosocial Interventions in Men and Women with Sexual Dysfunctions—A Systematic Review of Controlled Clinical Trials

Günzler, Cindy, Berner, Michael M.·2012·The Journal of Sexual Medicine
DOI 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2012.02965.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: As yet, a summary of the research evidence concerning the efficacy of psychological treatment in female sexual dysfunction is lacking. Previous reviews were often nonsystematic or explored one specific sexual dysfunction. AIM: Our systematic review provides an overview of the efficacy of psychosocial interventions in all female sexual dysfunction. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Main outcome measures included for example psychometrically validated scales, diary notes, interviews, and vulvar algesiometer. The efficacy of psychosocial interventions was measured for example by the frequency of and satisfaction with sexual activity and sexual functioning. Safety and acceptance were evaluated on the basis of adverse events and dropout rates. METHODS: The systematic literature search included electronic database search, handsearch, contact with experts, and an ancestry approach. Studies were included if the woman was given a formal diagnosis of a sexual dysfunction (International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems-ICD10/-9; Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-IV/-III-R) and when the intervention was psychosocial or psychotherapeutic. The control group included either another treatment or a waiting-list control group. The report of relevant outcomes was necessary for inclusion as well as the design of the study (randomized, controlled trials [RCTs] and controlled clinical trials). The assessment of methodological quality comprised aspects of randomization, blinding, incomplete outcome data, selective reporting, and allegiance. RESULTS: We identified 15 RCTs that investigated efficacy in female sexual dysfunction and two further studies that examined male and female sexual dysfunction together. Most trials explored sexual pain disorders. About half of all studies in women used either a concept derived from Masters and Johnson or a cognitive-behavioral treatment program. Both approaches showed significant improvements compared with a control group. Benefit was not always maintained over the (variable) follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: Traditional sexual therapeutic concepts proved to be efficacious in the treatment of female sexual dysfunction. A shortcoming was the rather low methodological quality of included studies.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2012.02965.x

Cites

68 of 68 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

1 retracted

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Foster, 2002, Vulvar disease, Obstet Gynecol, 100, 145
  2. BioSante Pharmaceuticals, 2011, BioSante Pharmaceuticals Announces Results from LibiGel® Efficacy Trials
  3. Trudel, 1985, Traitement Béhavioral des Dysfonctionnements Sexuels par Bibliothérapie: Les Résultats de Deux Études, Revue de modification du comportement, 15, 76
  4. Grawe, 2005, [(How) can psychotherapy be more effective by empirical validation?], Psychother J, 1, 4

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 110

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Günzler, C., & Berner, M. M.
Affiliations
University Medical Center Freiburg (DE)
Corresponding author
  • Günzler, Cindy
  • Berner, Michael M.
Venue
The Journal of Sexual Medicine
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2012-12-01
Volume
9
Issue
12
Pages
3108-3125
ISSN
  • 1743-6095 (ISSN-L)
  • 1743-6109
DOI
10.1111/j.1743-6109.2012.02965.x
OpenAlex
W3022744659
Cited by
110
References
69
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.34
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)
Funders
German Ministry for Education and Research (FKZ: 01 KG 0817)
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
female sexual dysfunction, psychosocial interventions, psychotherapy efficacy, sexual pain disorders, cognitive behavioral therapy, male sexual dysfunction, sexual satisfaction, methodological quality of trials
MeSH terms
Bibliotherapy, Biofeedback, Psychology, Female, Humans, Marital Therapy, Sexual Dysfunction, Physiological, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic

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