Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorFrost, R
dc.contributor.authorDonovan, C
dc.date.accessioned2019-05-29T13:15:43Z
dc.date.available2019-05-29T13:15:43Z
dc.date.issued2018
dc.identifier.issn1743-6095
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.jsxm.2018.06.004
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/381971
dc.description.abstractBackground: Sexual distress is an important factor in the etiology, maintenance, and treatment of sexual difficulties, and as such, there is a need for validated measures. A limitation in the research and treatment of distressing sexual difficulties has been the lack of validated measures, and in particular, existing measures are unable to measure the impacts at the relationship level and currently focus on intra-personal distress. Aim This study sought to develop and psychometrically evaluate a new measure of distress associated with sexual difficulties. Methods: An initial pool of 73 items was created from the results of an earlier qualitative study and administered using an online survey to 1,381 participants (462 men, 904 women, and 14 who identified as “other”), along with measures for the purposes of psychometric evaluation including the Female Sexual Distress Scale–Revised, Couples Satisfaction Index 16-item version, Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale–Short Form, and questions relating to sexual function. Exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis in separate split-half samples were conducted, followed by analysis of validity and reliability of the resulting measure. Outcomes: The Sexual and Relationship Distress Scale (SaRDS) was developed to meet the need for a patient-reported outcome measure of individual and relationship distress within the context of sexual dysfunction and resulted in a psychometrically sound 30-item, 14-factor measure of sexual and relationship distress. Results: The final 30 items explained 77.5% of the total variance and the confirmatory factor analysis showed that this model has an adequate fit (comparative fit index = .97, normed fit index = .95, root mean square error of approximation = .05). The final measure demonstrated good psychometric properties, with strong internal reliability (Cronbach alpha = .95 for the total score with individual sub-scales ranging from .70–.96), and convergent and discriminant validity when compared to current measures (Female Sexual Distress Scale–Revised, r = .82, P < .001; Couples Satisfaction Index, r = –.69, P < .001; Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale–Short Form, r = .37, P < .001).
dc.description.peerreviewedYes
dc.languageEnglish
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherElsevier
dc.publisher.placeUnited Kingdom
dc.relation.ispartofpagefrom1167
dc.relation.ispartofpageto1179
dc.relation.ispartofissue8
dc.relation.ispartofjournalJournal of Sexual Medicine
dc.relation.ispartofvolume15
dc.subject.fieldofresearchBiomedical and clinical sciences
dc.subject.fieldofresearchPsychology
dc.subject.fieldofresearchOther psychology not elsewhere classified
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode32
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode52
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode529999
dc.titleThe Development and Validation of the Sexual and Relationship Distress Scale
dc.typeJournal article
dc.type.descriptionC1 - Articles
dc.type.codeC - Journal Articles
gro.facultyGriffith Health, School of Applied Psychology
gro.hasfulltextNo Full Text
gro.griffith.authorFrost, Rebecca N.
gro.griffith.authorDonovan, Caroline L.


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Journal articles
    Contains articles published by Griffith authors in scholarly journals.

Show simple item record