SynthesisArchives of sexual behavior2026
Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Assessing Genital Self-Image: A Systematic Review of Measurement Properties.
Synthesis in Archives of sexual behavior, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This systematic review synthesizes and critically appraises the measurement properties of genital self-image measures. Nine measures that met the definition of body image assessment (i.e., subjective perceptions related to the genitals) were included. These measures were the Female Genital Self-Image Scale (FGSIS), Genital Self-Image Scale, Genital Appearance Satisfaction, Male Genital Self-Image Scale, FGSIS Spanish version, Index of Male Genital Image, and Korean Genital Image Scale. Articles evaluating the measurement properties of these scales (N = 22) were assessed for methodological quality using the COSMIN Risk of Bias Checklist. The COSMIN criteria were used to summarize and classify the measurement properties of each PROM. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation graded the evidence. None of the PROMs had all of the measurement properties graded, and there was insufficient evidence to support the recommendations. Only the FGSIS 7-item version was able to assess the quality of evidence for content validity, and its use was potentially recommended. The included studies had insufficient measurement properties. Future studies should collect additional data to assess the measurement properties of the FGSIS 7-item version using a robust methodology based on guidelines for conducting studies on measurement properties of PROMs. The measurement properties of each PROM are discussed in detail, including aspects of interpretability and feasibility.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.