MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4394183192 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.15111963

Supplementary Material for: Does Endometriosis Disturb Mental Health and Quality of Life? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021· review· en· W4394183192 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yihong Wang, Li B, Yumin Zhou, Xueyao Han, Shuang Zhang, Zuoli He, Liang Ouyang

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEndometriosis Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeta-analysisEndometriosisMental healthPsychologyQuality of life (healthcare)MedicinePsychotherapistInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: This study aimed to evaluate whether endometriosis could disturb the mental health and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of patients and to provide a new prospective for further treatment of endometriosis. Methods: A comprehensive literature review was conducted among 4 international databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library) and 2 of the largest Chinese databases (the China National Knowledge Infrastructure and Wangfang). The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the quality of the included articles. Six effect sizes were synthesized through a meta-analysis, and a subgroup analysis was performed to identify potential moderating factors, including types of control groups, methods of assessment, number of study groups, and origin of the study. Potential publication bias was examined using a funnel plot. Results: This meta-analysis pooled 44 articles from 4 continents and 13 countries and compared 6 types of main effect sizes (the odds ratio [OR] for depression, the OR for anxiety, the standardized mean difference [SMD] for depression, the SMD for anxiety, the SMD for the physical component summary [PCS] and the SMD for the mental component summary [MCS]) between endometriosis patients and controls. Except for the SMD for depression, all other effect sizes revealed statistically significant differences between the study group and the controls. The main effect size outcomes of the subgroup analysis were also similar. The type of control group (I2 = 35% in non-endometriosis control groups for the SMD of anxiety; I2 = 47% in non-endometriosis control groups for the MCS of the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey) and the continent of origin (I2 = 0% in studies from South America for the OR of depression; I2 = 47% in studies from Europe for the SMD of anxiety) may influence heterogeneity in this analysis. Additionally, depression and anxiety symptoms in patients seemed to be more apparent compared with healthy controls when the sample was smaller and when a questionnaire was used. The publication bias of the articles was acceptable. Conclusion: Endometriosis can disturb mental health (specifically depression and anxiety) and decrease both the mental and physical HRQoL of patients. There may be some moderating factors that we were unable to identify in the subgroup analysis, but more research is necessary to develop proper management and improve the prognosis of endometriosis patients.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.081
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.530
Threshold uncertainty score0.671

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.081
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.008
Bibliometrics0.0070.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.5300.020

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 head0.237
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.220 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshare→Same topicEndometriosis Research and Treatment→French-language works237,207→