Association of Central Sensitization Inventory Scores With Pain Outcomes After Endometriosis Surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Importance: A subset of people who undergo surgery for endometriosis have persistent pain, suggesting that other factors besides the endometriosis, such as central sensitization, may play a role in this pain. The Central Sensitization Inventory, a validated self-reported questionnaire of central sensitization symptoms, may identify individuals with endometriosis who have more pain after surgery due to pain sensitization. Objective: To examine whether greater baseline Central Sensitization Inventory scores are associated with postsurgical pain outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective, longitudinal cohort study performed at a tertiary center for endometriosis and pelvic pain in British Columbia, Canada, included all patients aged 18 to 50 years with diagnosed or suspected endometriosis and a baseline visit between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2019, who underwent surgery after the baseline visit. Individuals who were menopausal, had a prior hysterectomy, or were missing data for outcomes or measures were excluded. Data analysis was performed from July 2021 to June 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was chronic pelvic pain at follow-up measured on a scale of 0 to 10, with 0 to 3 indicating no pain or mild pain, 4 to 6 indicating moderate pain, and 7 to 10 indicating severe pain. Secondary outcomes were deep dyspareunia, dysmenorrhea, dyschezia, and back pain at follow-up. The main variable of interest was baseline Central Sensitization Inventory score (measured from 0 to 100, consisting of 25 self-reported questions rated from 0 to 4 [never, rarely, sometimes, often, and always, respectively]). Results: A total of 239 patients (mean [SD] age, 34 [7] years; 189 [79.1%] White [11 (5.8%) identified as White mixed with another ethnicity], 1 [0.4%] Black or African American, 29 [12.1%] Asian, 2 [0.8%] Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 16 [6.7%] other, and 2 [0.8%] mixed race or ethnicity) with follow-up data at more than 4 months after surgery were included in this study (71.0% follow-up rate). The mean (SD) baseline Central Sensitization Inventory score was 43.8 (18.2), and the mean (SD) follow-up was 16.1 (6.1) months. Higher baseline Central Sensitization Inventory scores were significantly associated with higher chronic pelvic pain (odds ratio [OR], 1.02; 95% CI, 1.00-1.03; P = .02), deep dyspareunia (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.04; P = .004), dyschezia (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.04; P < .001), and back pain (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.00-1.03; P = .02) at follow-up, when controlling for baseline pain scores. The Central Sensitization Inventory scores themselves decreased slightly from baseline to follow-up (mean [SD] score, 43.8 [18.2] vs 41.7 [18.9]; P = .05); however, individuals with high baseline Central Sensitization Inventory scores still had high scores at follow-up. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of 239 patients with endometriosis, higher Central Sensitization Inventory scores at baseline were associated with worse pain outcomes after endometriosis surgery, when controlling for baseline pain scores. The Central Sensitization Inventory could be used to counsel patients with endometriosis on their expected outcomes after surgery.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".