Translation and psychometrics of the Persian version of the Pregnancy Sexual Response Inventory (PSRI)

Document Type : Original Article


1 Assistant Professor of Biostatistics, Department of Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Hormozgan University of Medical Sciences, Bandar Abbas, Iran.

2 Assistant Professor, Department of Midwifery, Mother and Child Welfare Research Center, Hormozgan University of Medical Sciences, Bandar Abbas, Iran.

3 Associate Professor, Department of Midwifery and Reproductive Health, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.


Introduction: Sexual activity changes during pregnancy due to hormonal and physical changes in pregnant women. This leads to a higher prevalence of sexual dysfunction in pregnancy. Evaluation of sexual function with special tools is necessary to determine sexual dysfunction during pregnancy. Pregnancy Sexual Response Inventory is one of these tools. The present study was performed aimed to translate and determine the psychometric properties, and validate the Pregnancy Sexual Response Inventory (PSRI).
Methods: This correlation type descriptive-analytical study was translated from English to Persian "Forward / Backward" to translate, psychometrics, and validate the Pregnancy Sexual Response Inventory (PSRI) in 2021. After consulting the experts and pregnant mothers, the content and face validity of the scale were determined qualitatively. The final version of the questionnaire was completed by 260 pregnant women in Rasht, chosen via convenience sampling. The reliability of the questionnaire was assessed by Cronbach's alpha coefficient and Inter class correlation coefficient (ICC). The reliability and validity of the questionnaire structure was done by confirmatory factor analysis using AMOS software and other statistical analyzes using SPSS statistical software. P< 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Results: Intra-class correlation was shown for each scale between 0.602 and 0.902. There was also a moderate to high correlation between each subscale and the total score of the PSRI questionnaire. All indices of goodness indicated that all subscales of this questionnaire are suitable to measure pregnancy sexual response and activity.
Conclusion: The psychometric properties of the PSRI Scale showed the high reliability and validity of this scale and the possibility of using this tool in Iran.


  1. Wallwiener S, Müller M, Doster A, Kuon RJ, Plewniok K, Feller S, et al. Sexual activity and sexual dysfunction of women in the perinatal period: a longitudinal study. Archives of gynecology and obstetrics 2017; 295(4):873-83.
  2. Jamali S, Mosalanejad L. Sexual dysfnction in Iranian pregnant women. Iranian journal of reproductive medicine 2013; 11(6):479-86.
  3. Yeniel AO, Petri E. Pregnancy, childbirth, and sexual function: perceptions and facts. International urogynecology journal 2014; 25(1):5-14.
  4. Ahmed MR, Madny EH, Sayed Ahmed WA. Prevalence of female sexual dysfunction during pregnancy among E gyptian women. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research 2014; 40(4):1023-9.
  5. American Psychological Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-II. Washington DC: American Psychiatric Association 2013.
  6. Aribi L, Houidi B, Masmoudi R, Chaabane K, Guermazi M, Amami O. Female sexuality during pregnancy and postpartum: a study of 80 Tunisian women. La Tunisie Medicale 2012;90(12):873-7.
  7. Erol B, Sanli O, Korkmaz D, Seyhan A, Akman T, Kadioglu A. A cross-sectional study of female sexual function and dysfunction during pregnancy. The journal of sexual medicine 2007; 4(5):1381-7.
  8. Leite AP, Campos AA, Dias AR, Amed AM, De Souza E, Camano L. Prevalence of sexual dysfunction during pregnancy. Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira. 2009;55:563-8.
  9. Pauleta JR, Pereira NM, Graça LM. Sexuality during pregnancy. The journal of sexual medicine 2010; 7(1):136-42.
  10. Kennedy CM, Turcea AM, Bradley CS. Prevalence of vulvar and vaginal symptoms during pregnancy and the puerperium. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics 2009; 105(3):236-9.
  11. Kontoyannis M, Katsetos C, Panagopoulos P. Sexual intercourse during pregnancy. Health Science Journal 2012; 6(1):82-7.
  12. Aslan E, Beji NK, Gungor I, Kadioglu A, Dikencik BK. Prevalence and risk factors for low sexual function in women: a study of 1,009 women in an outpatient clinic of a university hospital in Istanbul. The Journal of Sexual Medicine 2008; 5(9):2044-52.
  13. Aydin M, Cayonu N, Kadihasanoglu M, Irkilata L, Atilla MK, Kendirci M. Comparison of sexual functions in pregnant and non-pregnant women. Urology journal 2015; 12(5):2339-44.
  14. Küçükdurmaz F, Efe E, Malkoç Ö, Kolus E, Amasyalı AS, Resim S. Prevalence and correlates of female sexual dysfunction among Turkish pregnant women. Turkish Journal of Urology 2016; 42(3):178-83.
  15. Naldoni LM, Pazmiño MA, Pezzan PA, Pereira SB, Duarte G, Ferreira CH. Evaluation of sexual function in Brazilian pregnant women. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy 2011; 37(2):116-29.
  16. Kerdarunsuksri A, Manusirivithaya S. Attitudes and sexual function in Thai pregnant women. Journal of the Medical Association of Thailand= Chotmaihet Thangphaet 2010; 93(3):265-71.
  17. Alizadeh S, Riazi H, Alavi-Majd H, Ozgoli G. Prevalence of female sexual dysfunction during pregnancy in Eastern Mediterranean Regional Office Countries (EMRO): a systematic review and meta-analysis. The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine 2021: 1-9.
  18. Johnson CE. Sexual health during pregnancy and the postpartum (CME). The journal of sexual medicine 2011; 8(5):1267-84.
  19. Serati M, Salvatore S, Siesto G, Cattoni E, Zanirato M, Khullar V, et al. Female sexual function during pregnancy and after childbirth. The journal of sexual medicine 2010; 7(8):2782-90.
  20. Alidost F, Dolatian M, Shams J, Nasiri M, Sarkhoshpour E. The Correlation of Sexual Dysfunction with Prenatal Stress and Quality of Life: A Path Analysis. Iranian Red Crescent Medical Journal 2017; 19(7).
  21. Nakip G, Gürşen C, Baran E, Üzelpasaci E, Çinar GN, Özgül S, et al. Psychometric properties of the Turkish version of the Pregnancy Sexual Response Inventory. Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2021; 304(1):101-7.
  22. Barclay L, Bond M, Clark M. Development of an instrument to study the sexual relationship of partners during pregnancy. The Australian journal of advanced nursing: a quarterly publication of the Royal Australian Nursing Federation 1992; 10(2):14-21.
  23. Rosen C, Brown J, Heiman S, Leiblum C, Meston R, Shabsigh D, et al. The Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI): a multidimensional self-report instrument for the assessment of female sexual function. Journal of sex & marital therapy 2000; 26(2):191-208.
  24. Fakhri A, Pakpour AH, Burri A, Morshedi H, Zeidi IM. The Female Sexual Function Index: translation and validation of an Iranian version. The journal of sexual medicine 2012; 9(2):514-23.
  25. Rudge CV, Calderon IM, Dias A, Lopes GP, Barbosa AP, Maestá I, et al. Design and validity of a questionnaire to assess sexuality in pregnant women. Reproductive Health 2009; 6(1):1-6.
  26. Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE, Tatham RL. Multivariate data analysis . Uppersaddle River. Multivariate Data Analysis (5th ed) Upper Saddle River. 1998;5(3):207-19.
  27. Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS, Ullman JB. Using multivariate statistics. Boston, MA: pearson; 2007.
  28. Plichta SB, Kelvin EA, Munro BH. Munro's statistical methods for health care research. 6nd Wolters Kluwer Health/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2013.
  29. Rudge CV, Calderon ID, Almeida AP, Piculo F, Rudge MV, Barbosa AM. Score establishment and Brazilian Portuguese version of the pregnancy sexual response inventory (PSRI). Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia 2018; 40:322-31.
  30. Taheri Tanjani P, Azadbakht M. Psychometric properties of the Persian version of the activities of daily living scale and instrumental activities of daily living scale in elderly. Journal of Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences 2016; 25(132):103-12.
  31. Nikan F, Jafarabadi MA, Mohammad-Alizadeh-Charandabi S, Mirghafourvand M, Montazeri A, Asadi S. Psychometric properties of the Iranian version of a postpartum women’s quality of life questionnaire (PQOL): a methodological study. Iranian Red Crescent Medical Journal 2016; 18(7).
  32. Lawshe CH. A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel psychology 1975; 28(4):563-75.
  33. Mohammadbeigi A, Mohammadsalehi N, Aligol M. Validity and reliability of the instruments and types of measurments in health applied researches. Journal of rafsanjan university of medical sciences 2015; 13(12):1153-70.
  34. Ayre C, Scally AJ. Critical values for Lawshe’s content validity ratio: revisiting the original methods of calculation. Measurement and evaluation in counseling and development 2014; 47(1):79-86.
  35. Herfehdoost M, Zeinali S, Biabani N. A Sexual Arousal/Inhibition Questionnaire: Psychometric Properties in Iranian Women. The Women and Families Cultural-Educational 2020; 15(52):129-48.
  36. McDowell I. Measuring health: a guide to rating scales and questionnaires. 3nd New York: Oxford University Press, USA; 2006.
  37. Bahrami N, Soleimani MA, Shraifnia H, Masoodi R, Shaigan H. Female Sexual Satisfaction with Different Contraceptive Methods. Iran Journal of Nursing (2008-5923) 2012; 25(76).
  38. Maasoumi R, Tavousi M, Zarei F. Development and psychometric properties of sexual health literacy for adults (SHELA) questionnaire. Hayat Journal 2019; 25(1):56-69.
  39. Darooneh T, Sheikhan Z, Saei Ghare Naz M, Jalali-Chimeh F, Kholosi F, Nasiri M, et al. The prognostic factors of sexual dysfunction among selected pregnant women in Tehran City, Iran. Journal of Isfahan Medical School 2019; 37(522):328-34.