MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406177967 · doi:10.2196/58262

A Digital Program for Daily Life Management With Endometriosis: Pilot Cohort Study on Symptoms and Quality of Life Among Participants

2025· article· en· W4406177967 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zélia Breton, Émilie Stern, Mathilde Pinault, Delphine Lhuillery, E. Petit, P. Panel, Maïa Alexaline

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEndometriosis Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreprintQuality of life (healthcare)EndometriosisGerontologyPsychologyMedicinePhysical therapyGynecologyComputer sciencePsychotherapistWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: After experiencing symptoms for an average of 7 years before diagnosis, patients with endometriosis are usually left with more questions than answers about managing their symptoms in the absence of a cure. To help women with endometriosis after their diagnosis, we developed a digital program combining user research, evidence-based medicine, and clinical expertise. Structured around cognitive behavioral therapy and the quality of life metrics from the Endometriosis Health Profile score, the program was designed to guide participants for 3 months. OBJECTIVE: This cohort study was designed to measure the impact of a digital health program on the symptoms and quality of life levels of women with endometriosis. METHODS: In total, 63% (92/146) of the participants were included in the pilot study, recruited either free of charge through employer health insurance or via individual direct access. A control group of 404 women with endometriosis who did not follow the program, recruited through social media and mailing campaigns, was sampled (n=149, 36.9%) according to initial pain levels to ensure a similar pain profile to participants. Questionnaires assessing quality of life and symptom levels were emailed to both groups at baseline and 3 months. Descriptive statistics and statistical tests were used to analyze intragroup and intergroup differences, with Cohen d measuring effect sizes for significant results. RESULTS: Over 3 months, participants showed substantial improvements in global symptom burden, general pain level, anxiety, depression, dysmenorrhea, dysuria, chronic fatigue, neuropathic pain, and endo belly. These improvements were significantly different from the control group for global symptom burden (participants: mean -0.7, SD 1.6; controls: mean -0.3, SD 1.3; P=.048; small effect size), anxiety (participants: mean -1.1, SD 2.8; controls: mean 0.2, SD 2.5; P<.001; medium effect size), depression (participants: mean -0.9, SD 2.5; controls: mean 0.0, SD 3.1; P=.04; small effect size), neuropathic pain (participants: mean -1.0, SD 2.7; controls: mean -0.1, SD 2.6; P=.004; small effect size), and endo belly (participants: mean -0.9, SD 2.5; controls: mean -0.3, SD 2.4; P=.03; small effect size). Participants' quality of life improved between baseline and 3 months and significantly differed from that of the control group for the core part of the Endometriosis Health Profile-5 (participants: mean -5.9, SD 21.0; controls: mean 1.0, SD 14.8; P=.03; small effect size) and the EQ-5D (participants: mean 0.1, SD 0.1; controls: mean -0.0, SD 0.1; P=.001; medium effect size). Perceived knowledge of endometriosis was significantly greater at 3 months among participants compared to the control group (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study's results suggest that a digital health program providing medical and scientific information about endometriosis and multidisciplinary self-management tools may be useful to reduce global symptom burden, anxiety, depression, neuropathic pain, and endo belly while improving knowledge on endometriosis and quality of life among participants.

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)0.002
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
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 integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.470
Teacher spread0.355 · 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

Citations7
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative ResearchSame topicEndometriosis Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207