Prevalence, Symptomatic Burden, and Diagnosis of Endometriosis in Canada: Cross-Sectional Survey of 30 000 Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study sought to estimate the prevalence of diagnosis of endometriosis (DxE) in Canada and to assess the symptomatic and diagnostic experience of Canadian women with DxE. METHOD: A cross-sectional, online survey of women in Canada aged 18 to 49 was conducted from December 7, 2018 through January 24, 2019. Survey data were weighted by Canadian population statistics to estimate the prevalence, symptomatic burden, and diagnostic experience of DxE. Logistic regressions were used to assess differences in symptom burden between women with and without DxE. RESULTS: The estimated prevalence of DxE was 7.0% (2004 women of 28 532 women surveyed). Almost half (47.5%) of women with DxE were aged 18 to 29 when they received an endometriosis diagnosis, and 84.1% experienced symptoms before diagnosis. More women with versus without DxE experienced menstrual pelvic pain or cramping (70.3% vs. 50.7%), non-menstrual pelvic pain or cramping (49.5% vs. 18.7%), dyspareunia (52.5% vs. 28.0%), and infertility (22.3% vs. 6.3%). Women with DxE were more likely to report severe menstrual pelvic pain or cramping (odds ratio [OR] 2.9; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.5-3.3), non-menstrual pelvic pain or cramping (OR 3.4; 95% CI 2.8-4.2), general abdominal pain (OR 3.0; 95% CI 2.5-3.6), and pelvic pressure (OR 3.0; 95% CI 2.3-3.8). Women with DxE reported an average 5.4-year diagnostic delay, with a 3.1-year delay from onset of symptoms to physician consultation and a 2.3-year delay between physician consultation and diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Self-reported DxE is prevalent among Canadian women and is associated with a substantial symptomatic burden. The 5.4-year diagnostic delay reported here indicates an important unmet need for more timely diagnosis of endometriosis in Canada.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.046 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".