Web-Based Digital Storytelling for Endometriosis and Pain: Qualitative Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Endometriosis is a complex chronic disease characterized by pain, including painful sex, that can contribute to considerable sexual function, self-esteem, and relationship challenges. Digital storytelling is an arts-based, participatory methodology wherein individuals create and share their illness experiences in detailing their lived experiences. OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to pilot-test a web-based digital storytelling workshop focused on endometriosis to understand storytellers' experiences of workshop participation. We assessed the feasibility of story cocreation and sharing, including the emotional impact of workshop participation, the acceptability of the workshop for the subject matter, and the storytellers' willingness to share their stories with broader audiences as a method for knowledge translation. METHODS: This study used a community-based participatory methodology supplemented with patient-oriented research and integrated knowledge translation. Study participants, referred to as storytellers, cocreated 3- to 5-minute individual digital stories about their lived experiences of endometriosis during a web-based workshop (comprising five 2-hour sessions over 6 weeks) facilitated by The Center for Digital Storytelling. Data were collected through participant observations at the workshop, storyteller weekly reflective journals, and an end-of-workshop focus group interview with storytellers. These data were analyzed using a qualitative interpretive description approach. RESULTS: A total of 5 women and 1 nonbinary storyteller aged 19 to 39 years who had experienced endometriosis for 4 to 22 years participated in the study. We characterized storytelling workshop participation and the acceptability of story cocreation by describing participants' experiences of opportunity, commitment, and connection; complex emotions that were healing; and a desire to share. Feasibility was demonstrated through 100% engagement in the workshops. All 6 storytellers reported feeling empowered by publicly sharing their cocreated digital stories through social media and the Sex, Pain & Endometriosis website. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the complexities of the story-building process, the workshop and the cocreation and sharing of digital stories were feasible. The storytellers found that this process allowed for emotional healing and personal empowerment by offering a unique way to talk about painful sex, which also facilitated a connection among those in the workshop. The use of digital storytelling as a knowledge translation tool shows promise, and this approach also has potential as a therapeutic intervention.
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 | 0.011 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".