Prevalence of symptoms consistent with a diagnosis of vulvodynia: population-based estimates from 2 geographic regions

In: American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2013 · vol. 210(1) , pp. 40.e1–40.e8 · doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2013.09.033 · PMID:24080300 · W2023517643
article OA: bronze CC0 ⤵ 7 in-corpus citations
AI-generated summary by gemini-2.5-flash-lite, 2026-06-09

This population-based study estimated the prevalence of symptoms consistent with vulvodynia in two geographic regions.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

ObjectiveWe used validated sensitive and specific questions associated with clinically confirmed diagnoses of unexplained vulvar pain (vulvodynia) to compare the cumulative incidence of vulvar pain and prevalence of care-seeking behavior in Boston metropolitan area (BMA) and in Minneapolis/Saint Paul metropolitan area (MSP) from 2001 through 2005 using census-based data, and 2010 through 2012, using outpatient community-clinic data, respectively.Study designWe received self-administered questionnaires from 5440 women in BMA and 13,681 in MSP, 18-40 years of age, describing their history of vulvar burning or pain on contact that persisted >3 months that limited/prevented intercourse.ResultsBy age 40 years, 7-8% in BMA and MSP reported vulvar pain consistent with vulvodynia. Women of Hispanic origin compared to whites were 1.4 times more likely to develop vulvar pain symptoms (95% confidence interval, 1.1-1.8). Many women in MSP (48%) and BMA (30%) never sought treatment, and >50% who sought care with known health care access received no diagnosis.ConclusionUsing identical screening methods, we report high prevalence of vulvar pain in 2 geographic regions, and that access to health care does not increase the likelihood of seeking care for chronic vulvar pain.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Citation neighborhood

Papers in the corpus that this work cites (lower rings, blue) and that cite this one (upper rings, green). Dot size scales with the paper's in-corpus citation count — bigger dot = more influential within the endo/adeno field. Click a dot to open that paper. [ expand to 2 hops ] — adds papers reached through this work's immediate citers/citees. Heavier; up to 60 extra dots.

References (20)

Cited by (7)

Source provenance

openalex
last seen: 2026-06-10T17:14:06.276822+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK