Deep and Superficial Dyspareunia Questionnaire: a patient-reported outcome measure for genito-pelvic dyspareunia
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
INTRODUCTION: Dyspareunia affects 8%-22% of women worldwide and an unknown number of gender-diverse people. Dyspareunia is commonly categorized into deep and superficial subtypes based on pain location and underlying etiology; however, current assessment tools inadequately differentiate between pain locations. AIM: This study aimed to develop a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) that independently assesses deep and superficial dyspareunia and its psychosocial correlates: the Deep and Superficial Dyspareunia Questionnaire (DSDQ). METHODS: The DSDQ development stages included item construction, categorization, review/revision, focus groups, cognitive interviews, final review, and factor analysis. Items were developed by reviewing pre-existing measures related to dyspareunia. Constructs of these measures were adapted to create items for the DSDQ. Developed items were categorized according to a conceptual framework. To review items, 4 patient partners, 2 gynecologists, and 1 psychiatrist participated in a modified eDelphi process. Next, 3 patient focus groups (n = 5, n = 3, n = 4), 1 clinician focus group (n = 2), and patient cognitive interviews (n = 15) were conducted over 2 rounds. A qualitative descriptive approach guided interview analysis, which informed DSDQ modifications and generated evidence of validity. Clinician-researchers (n = 4) and patient partners (n = 2) completed the final revision. Lastly, an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) determined the most appropriate factor structure. OUTCOMES: Generated items, validity, factor structure. RESULTS: Fifty-nine pre-existing measures were reviewed to generate an initial pool of 163 items. Items created were categorized into domains for characteristics (pain quality, timing, location, and intensity) or psychosocial correlates (impact of pain on cognitions, affect, sexuality, and behavior). The eDelphi modified 40 items, added 23, and excluded 10. After the final review, 175 items were approved for psychometric analysis. The EFA supported a 103-item, 6-factor model. The CFA supported a 45-item, 6-factor model. Factors included: (1) Vaginal Opening Pain; (2) Deep Vaginal/Pelvic/Abdominal Pain; (3) Pain Interference; (4) Affect and Cognitions Related to Provoked Pain; (5) Sexual Distress Related to Sexual Well-being; and (6) Pain Self-efficacy. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The DSDQ will aid diagnosis, treatment, and assessment of dyspareunia changes over time in research and clinical settings. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS: Strengths of this work include DSDQ co-development with patient partners, multidisciplinary clinicians, and researchers, as well as the rigorous mixed-methods development. Limitations include demographic and clinical homogeneity of the patient samples and sample sizes for the EFA and CFA. CONCLUSIONS: The DSDQ is a 45-item measure intended to assess deep and superficial dyspareunia. Future psychometric evaluation will further establish validity and reliability evidence.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».