OBJECTIVES: The recall period associated with any patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure is critical to the interpretation of the measure. However, the most appropriate recall period is often unclear. The objective of this analysis was to compare responses to two satisfaction with sexual intercourse (SSI) measures with different recall periods. METHODS: Sexual health data and intravaginal ejaculatory latency time (IELT) were collected from 1115 men and their female partners as a part of a two-month observational study of men with and without premature ejaculation (PE) from five European countries. Data from men diagnosed with PE are included in this analysis (n=196). IELT was measured by a female-operated stopwatch and recorded by the male subject on an event log. Two single-item measures of SSI were collected: 1) “Over the past month, was your satisfaction with sexual intercourse: 0=very poor, 1=poor, 2=fair, 3=good, or 4=very good?” and 2) “Were you satisfied overall with this sexual experience?” (yes/no). Responses to the first item were recorded by the male subjects at the study site. The second measure was assessed following each sexual intercourse and recorded on the event log along with the IELT. For this per-event item, a mean percentage SSI was computed for each subject over a one-month period so that the recall periods for the two measures were comparable. RESULTS: There was a strong association between SSI measures based on one-month recall and the percentage of satisfactory sexual experiences based on the event log data: Very poor (Mean=12.6%, SD=29.4%, n=11), Poor (Mean=24.0%, SD=19.0%, n=49), Fair (Mean=63.7%, SD=25.0%, n=66), Good (Mean=85.6%, SD=16.8%, n=52) and Very good (Mean=95.6%, SD=7.3%, n=18). CONCLUSIONS: Measures of SSI assessed on a per-event basis and using a one-month recall period are highly associated suggesting that either measure could be used to assess outcomes related to SSI among men with PE.