Leiszle Lapping-Carr, Osmar Matsui-Santana, Elsa Almås
A total of 344 responses from 60 countries went through careful data cleaning to ensure response validity. This yielded a final sample of 165 responses from 39 countries (Africa, n = 6; Asia-Oceania, n = 5; Latin America, n = 75; North America, n = 29; Europe, n = 48; East Mediterranean, n = 2) for inclusion in analyses. Primary reasons for exclusion were duplicate response (n = 47) and nonprogrammatic training offerings (n = 78). Surveys were mostly completed by training program directors and instructors. Most programs were certificate or continuing education courses (47%) or integrated into health professional degree programs (29%), although this varied by world region. Most programs were highly interdisciplinary, accepting students with a range of professional backgrounds.
BACKGROUND: Sexual health is crucial to overall health and well-being, yet it is difficult for clinicians to get sufficient training in clinical sexology. Educating clinical sexologists is pivotal to improving sexual health for the public. There is limited research on sexology training availability and quality in many global regions. The current study aims to describe the state of professional education in clinical sexology around the world.
METHODS: The World Association of Sexual Health (WAS) Professional Education in Sexology (PES) committee developed a survey for a cross-sectional study of sexology training programs, describing features such as availability, structure, and academic discipline. The web-based survey was distributed globally by PES committee members and the WAS Media committee electronically in three waves: March-October 2023, December 2023-June 2024, and September 2024-January 2025.
RESULTS: A total of 344 responses from 60 countries went through careful data cleaning to ensure response validity. This yielded a final sample of 165 responses from 39 countries (Africa, n = 6; Asia-Oceania, n = 5; Latin America, n = 75; North America, n = 29; Europe, n = 48; East Mediterranean, n = 2) for inclusion in analyses. Primary reasons for exclusion were duplicate response (n = 47) and nonprogrammatic training offerings (n = 78). Surveys were mostly completed by training program directors and instructors. Most programs were certificate or continuing education courses (47%) or integrated into health professional degree programs (29%), although this varied by world region. Most programs were highly interdisciplinary, accepting students with a range of professional backgrounds.
DISCUSSION: This is the first global survey of professional education in sexology and provides novel insights into features of clinical sexology training across major world regions. The results have potential to inform global standards in clinical sexology training programs and support accreditation efforts to enable access to high quality education in clinical sexology around the world. Study limitations and indications for future research are discussed.