Cross-Sectional Survey of the Impact of Endometriosis Symptoms on Health-Related Quality of Life in Canadian Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To characterize the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of Canadian women with a self-reported diagnosis of endometriosis (DxE). METHODS: Canadian women aged 18-49 years completed a survey from December 2018 through January 2019 in which HRQOL was assessed via the 12-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) and Endometriosis Health Profile-30 (EHP-30) questionnaire. We used t tests to compare SF-12 scores between women with and without a self-reported DxE, as well as the severity of hallmark endometriosis symptoms, including menstrual pelvic pain/cramping, non-menstrual pelvic pain/cramping, and dyspareunia, for women with a DxE (moderate/severe vs. mild/none). The effects of overall endometriosis symptom severity on HRQOL were assessed via analysis of variance. RESULTS: In total, 26 528 women without a DxE and 2004 women with a self-reported DxE were included. SF-12 scores were significantly lower for women with versus without a DxE (Mental Component Summary: 38.6 vs. 41.2; Physical Component Summary: 47.3 vs. 52.1; both P < 0.001), indicating reduced HRQOL. Moderate/severe hallmark endometriosis symptoms were associated with low SF-12 scores (i.e., worse HRQOL), with the greatest impact from non-menstrual pelvic pain/cramping. EHP-30 scores for women with a DxE ranged from 40.6 to 46.8, with the greatest impairment in self-image. Women with severe endometriosis symptoms had EHP-30 scores 1.3- and >2-fold higher (i.e., worse) than those with moderate and mild symptoms, at 67.5-74.6 versus 51.3-56.9 and 25.6-32.9, respectively. CONCLUSION: Canadian women with a self-reported diagnosis of endometriosis had significantly impaired health-related quality of life, which was inversely correlated with endometriosis symptom severity. This finding highlights a substantial unmet need among women with endometriosis.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".