Female Sexual Dysfunction: Screening, Diagnosis, and Management

A PA-focused clinical review covering FSD classification, risk factors, and treatments — no original data, no reported effect sizes

Journal: JAAPA | Published: 2026-03-24 | Type: Review | PMID: 41874089 Authors: Danielle O'Laughlin (co-director of clinical skills, Mayo PA Program) Funding/COI: Not listed

Summary

This is a narrative clinical education article, not original research. It synthesizes existing literature on female sexual dysfunction (FSD) for practicing physician assistants, covering classification, pathophysiology, risk factors, screening, and management. The central premise — that FSD is underreported and underdiscussed in routine care — is well-established in the literature, though the abstract offers no numbers to quantify the gap.

Claims

• FSD significantly impacts quality of life in women
• FSD is frequently underreported in clinical encounters
• The article presents "emerging and established" treatment options (unspecified in abstract)
• Screening and structured diagnosis are presented as actionable for PA practice

Study Quality

This is a narrative review published in a continuing medical education journal aimed at physician assistants. It carries no original data, no systematic search methodology, and no PRISMA or PROSPERO registration. Without access to the full text, it is impossible to evaluate which studies informed the treatment recommendations or how the evidence was weighted. Narrative reviews are inherently subject to author selection bias — the sources chosen reflect the author's familiarity and preferences, not a reproducible synthesis of the evidence base.

Published in JAAPA, a CE-oriented trade journal rather than a high-impact peer-reviewed research outlet, this article is best read as a clinical primer, not an evidence summary.

Red Flags

• No original data — the abstract reports no statistics, effect sizes, or sample sizes
• Narrative review design: no systematic search, no PRISMA, no risk-of-bias assessment
• "Emerging treatments" mentioned without specification — a phrase that often signals low-evidence optimism
• No funding or COI disclosure; unusual to omit even for a review
• JAAPA is a PA CE journal, not a venue known for rigorous evidence synthesis

Strengths

• Addresses a genuine clinical gap: FSD is underdiscussed relative to male sexual dysfunction in primary care literature
• Author affiliation (Mayo PA Program) suggests clinical credibility
• Published 2026, likely reflects reasonably current literature
• Covers the full diagnostic-to-management pipeline in one article, useful for generalist practice

Verdict

This is a clinical education piece, not a research paper — evaluate it accordingly. It won't change what urologists or specialists know, but it may move the needle on whether FSD gets asked about in PA-staffed primary care encounters, which is a real problem. Don't cite this for evidence on treatment efficacy. Cite it, if at all, for the argument that FSD is systematically underdiscussed in clinical settings.