Turkish validity and reliability of the sexual complaints screener for men

被引:0
|
作者
Gunduz, Anil [1 ]
Sertcelik, Sencan [1 ]
Gundogmus, Ibrahim [2 ]
Eroglu, Meliha Zengin [1 ]
Bayazit, Rayka Kumru
Gonul, Hatice [1 ]
Yasar, Alisan Burak [3 ]
Sungur, Mehmet Zihni [3 ]
机构
[1] Haydarpasa Numune Training & Res Hosp, Dept Psychiat, Tibbiye Cad 23, TR-34668 Uskudar Istanbul, Turkey
[2] Sultan Abdulhamid Han Training & Res Hosp, Dept Psychiat, Uskudar Istanbul, Turkey
[3] Marmara Univ, Res & Educ Hosp, Dept Psychiat, Istanbul, Turkey
关键词
Male sexual dysfuntions; sexual problems; validity; reliability; self report; DYSFUNCTION; SCALE;
D O I
10.1080/24750573.2018.1505421
中图分类号
R9 [药学];
学科分类号
1007 ;
摘要
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the validity and reliability parameters of the Turkish version of the Sexual Complaints Screener for Men (SCS-M) which is a promising brief measure to assess sexual problems in daily practice. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted online. Data was collected through an online validated and content specific questionnaire via self-reporting. In total, 230 male participants between the ages of 18 and 25 submitted the questionnaire. SCS-M was translated into Turkish and applied with the International Index of Erectile Function, the Short Form Health Survey (SF-36). The p-value was evaluated statistically significant at p<0.05. RESULTS: The average age of participants was 21.89 +/- 2.08. The Cronbach alpha internal consistency coefficient of the scale was 0.818. Correlation analysis between SCS-M, IIEF and IIEF sub-scales were statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Turkish version of the SCS-M presented good psychometric parameters. SCS-M is a valid and reliable measure for the screening and evaluation of sexual complaints. It was additionally identified as a valuable contributor to the short measures in assessing male sexual problems in research and clinical practice.
引用
收藏
页码:597 / 602
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] THE CYSTIC FIBROSIS BARRIERS TO ADHERENCE SCREENER (BAS): RELIABILITY AND PRELIMINARY VALIDITY
    Riekert, Kristin
    Eckmann, Thomas
    Quittner, Alexandra
    [J]. ANNALS OF BEHAVIORAL MEDICINE, 2019, 53 : S773 - S773
  • [32] Reliability and Validity of the Visual, Musculoskeletal, and Balance Complaints Questionnaire
    Lundqvist, Lars-Olov
    Zetterlund, Christina
    Richter, Hans O.
    [J]. OPTOMETRY AND VISION SCIENCE, 2016, 93 (09) : 1147 - 1157
  • [33] Turkish Adaptation of the ADORE: A Study of Validity and Reliability
    Ozdemir, Sevil Cicek
    Erenel, Ayten Senturk
    [J]. HEALTH EDUCATION & BEHAVIOR, 2024, 51 (04) : 648 - 656
  • [34] Surgical Anxiety Questionnaire: Turkish validity and reliability
    Bolukbas, Nurgul
    Gol, Gokcen
    [J]. PSYCHOLOGY HEALTH & MEDICINE, 2024, 29 (09) : 1652 - 1663
  • [35] The validity and the reliability study of the Egocentricism Scale in Turkish
    Askun, Duysal
    Cetin, Fatih
    [J]. ANADOLU PSIKIYATRI DERGISI-ANATOLIAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY, 2017, 18 (05): : 485 - 494
  • [36] The Measure of Quality of the Environments' Turkish Validity and Reliability
    Akyurek, Gokcen
    Bumin, Gonca
    [J]. OTJR-OCCUPATION PARTICIPATION AND HEALTH, 2019, 39 (04) : 239 - 246
  • [37] The Validity and Reliability of the Turkish Pet Attitude Scale
    Akyil, Rahsan Cevik
    Saritas, Seyhan Citlik
    Kahraman, Aysegul
    Akyil, Musa Samil
    Abacigil, Filiz
    [J]. MEANDROS MEDICAL AND DENTAL JOURNAL, 2022, 23 (01): : 94 - 100
  • [38] Turkish validity and reliability of coronavirus anxiety scale
    Nurten Arslan Işik
    Gülden Küçükakça Çelik
    Gülsün Ayran
    [J]. Current Psychology, 2022, 41 : 5612 - 5620
  • [39] The Reliability and Validity of the Turkish Version of the Fibrofatigue Scale
    Kulcu, Duygu Geler
    Akbas, Berfu
    Bicakcigil, Muge
    Gulsen, Gulcin
    Yavuzer, Gunes
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MUSCULOSKELETAL PAIN, 2010, 18 (02): : 159 - 166
  • [40] Turkish validity and reliability of the COVERS pain scale
    Incekar, Mujde Calikusu
    Ogut, Nehir Ulu
    Mutlu, Birsen
    Cecen, Eda
    Can, Emrah
    [J]. REVISTA DA ASSOCIACAO MEDICA BRASILEIRA, 2021, 67 (06): : 882 - 888