MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4320711821 · doi:10.1111/aogs.14488

The impact of diagnostic method on sense of <i>control and powerlessness</i> and <i>social support</i> in endometriosis patients—A retrospective cohort study

2023· article· en· W4320711821 on OpenAlexaff
Ciara Hanly, Mathew Leonardi, Allie Eathorne, Mike Armour

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Obstetricia Et Gynecologica Scandinavica · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEndometriosis Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEndometriosisRetrospective cohort studyStatistical significanceCohortDiseaseClinical significanceCohort studySurgeryGynecologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: It is recognized that for individuals living with endometriosis, receiving a diagnosis is psychosocially beneficial, but little is known about whether this is influenced by the way in which the disease is diagnosed. The primary objective of this study was to determine the impact of the diagnostic test method (clinical, diagnostic imaging, or diagnostic laparoscopy) of endometriosis on the individual's sense of control over their disease and their perceived access to social supports. The secondary objectives were to identify the impact of the diagnostic method on perceived social support, and to explore if there was a difference in the diagnostic method utilization between countries. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study reports on data collected using the Endometriosis Health Profile-30 (EHP-30) section of a previously published larger survey conducted between May and July 2020. Women aged 18-55 years who had received a diagnosis of endometriosis were recruited by social media platforms. The two domains of interest on the EHP-30 were control and powerlessness and social support. Scores on these domains were analyzed with diagnosis method as the variable of interest. RESULTS: In all, 1634 valid survey responses were received. There was a small statistically significant difference found between control and powerlessness scores for patients that received a diagnosis via imaging (ultrasound/MRI; n = 120) vs clinical diagnosis (n = 121) (p = 0.049). However, this did not reach clinical significance when covariates were controlled for (p = 0.054). No other comparisons reached statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnostic method of endometriosis does not appear to have a clinically significant impact on an individual's sense of control over their disease nor their access to social supports. However, further research into these domains to delineate the true impact of the diagnostic method is required.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.322 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa Obstetricia Et Gynecologica ScandinavicaSame topicEndometriosis Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207