MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4324353080 · doi:10.26685/urncst.450

Patient and Practitioner: The Impact of Social Factors on Diagnostic Delay for Endometriosis

2023· article· en· W4324353080 on OpenAlexaff
Kimberly Drinkell, Hannah Fajzel, Kiera Tordon

Bibliographic record

VenueUndergraduate Research in Natural and Clinical Science and Technology (URNCST) Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEndometriosis Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsycINFOEndometriosisMedicineCompetence (human resources)DiseaseHealth carePsychologyMEDLINEFamily medicinePsychiatryGynecologySocial psychologyPathology

Abstract

Introduction: Endometriosis is a gynaecological disease with diverse symptoms that are often shared with other disorders and is characterized by long diagnostic delays. Delayed diagnosis prevents patients from receiving access to care and negatively impacts both physical and mental health. While technical limitations of the diagnostic procedure contribute to the delay, there is also significant delay in first seeking consultation as well as getting referred to specialized care that point to social differences rather than medical factors. This literature review aims to identify social determinants that contribute to these delays in endometriosis diagnosis. Methods: A literary search was conducted using PubMed, PsycInfo, and Web of Science. The search yielded a total of 549 articles. Of these, 22 articles were selected based on established search terms and criteria including that the articles had to present original data, be written in English, be published no earlier than 2012, and have full-text availability. Results: Factors contributing to diagnostic delay can be related to one of two groups: the patient and the practitioner Patient factors that increase delay include certain demographic characteristics, the extent of pain normalization, the stigma surrounding women’s health, and the lack of self-advocacy. Practitioner factors that increase diagnostic delay include dismissive attitudes, the lack of knowledge and technical competence concerning endometriosis, and their relationship with patients as a position of authority. Discussion: Many identified factors share similar themes but are manifested differently amongst patients and practitioners, particularly those relating to the lack of familiarity with endometriosis and the normalization or dismissal of symptoms. Shared findings point to larger societal factors influencing both patients and practitioners. Conclusion: The findings of this review provide insight into social determinants that contribute to the long delays associated with endometriosis diagnosis. Future research should be aimed at establishing interventions for identified factors and also address larger shared social beliefs and misconceptions that maintain stigmas about women’s health.

Stored with the screening record, where it is evidence for the labels above.

How this classification was reachedexpand

The three-model screen

all 5,600 screened works →

All three models called this out of scope.

stratum: aff_core · design weight: 5595.24 (the sample is stratified; any rate computed without the weight is wrong)
Claude Opus 4.8OUT
genre: empirical
about Canada: no
confidence: medium

Literature review of social determinants of diagnostic delay in endometriosis; uses a review to answer a clinical-epidemiological question.

GPT-5.6 (high)OUT
genre: empirical
about Canada: no
confidence: high

This reviews social determinants of delayed endometriosis diagnosis, not evidence-synthesis methodology.

Grok 4.5OUT
genre: conceptual
about Canada: no
confidence: high

Literature review of social factors delaying endometriosis diagnosis; clinical care pathways, not research systems.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.472
Teacher spread0.386 · 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 venueUndergraduate Research in Natural and Clinical Science and Technology (URNCST) JournalSame topicEndometriosis Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207