This paper examines the published reliability and validity of non-disease specific, self-report measures of sexual function. Relevant papers were found in a search of the Embase electronic bibliographic database, for English language papers (published 1980-99) reporting on the psychometric testing of sexual function questionnaires. Existing published reviews or collections of such instruments were also searched, and the reference lists of all papers obtained were "back-searched" to identify other measures. Included measures were evaluated in a systematic manner using published standards concerning the validity, internal consistency, and reproducibility of health measurement scales and quality of life measures. Twenty-three self-report measures were identified for inclusion in this review VSports手机版. A further 2 measures were identified by reviewers of this paper after the main searches were undertaken. One measure was found not to be exclusively self-report. Eleven (46% of 24 included measures) did not meet minimum published standards for reliability, internal consistency, and validity. However one of these was reliable and valid in the female-version only. Of the 14 reliable and valid measures, or versions thereof (58% of 24), 2 (8% of 24) met "superior" psychometric standards. Many measures were developed for use with patients in sex or marital therapy, and are mainly suitable for administration to people with long-term sex partners. It is sensible to assume that instruments are only reliable and valid in the often specialized populations in which they were developed. .