Chronic gynaecological pain: an exploration of medical attitudes

Susan A. Selfe, Mark van Vugt, William Stones
In: Pain · 1998 · vol. 77(2) , pp. 215–225 · doi:10.1016/s0304-3959(98)00104-3 · PMID:9766840 · W1967594288
article OA: closed CC0 ⤵ 17 in-corpus citations
View on OpenAlex View on PubMed View at publisher
⚙ AI-generated summary by claude@2026-06, 2026-06-06 ⓘ

This study characterized medical attitudes towards chronic pelvic pain, finding that younger, female, and Caucasian gynaecologists scored higher on socio-cultural liberalism.

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

Abstract

Women with chronic pelvic pain experience serious distress and lifestyle disruption. Confronted with a difficult condition to diagnose and treat effectively, doctors express a negative perception of this group of 'heartsink' patients. This study aimed to characterise medical attitudes towards the treatment of women with chronic pelvic pain. Tape recorded focus group discussions with gynaecologists, general practitioners and patients were transcribed and analysed using ethnographic software to identify themes. A postal questionnaire was sent to 300 British gynaecologists of which 145 were returned (48%). Principal components analysis identified five factors accounting for 32.4% of the variance, labelled 'efficiency', 'complexity', 'socio-cultural liberalism', 'pathology' and 'communication'. Scores for 'socio-cultural liberalism' were higher among gynaecologists in the younger age groups, women, and those giving their ethnic origin as Caucasian. Scores for 'pathology' were lower among younger gynaecologists. A sex difference just failed to reach statistical significance. Multiple linear regression confirmed significant independent relationships with scores for 'socio-cultural liberalism' and respondent sex, ethnicity and age group under 38 years.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Condition tags

chronic_pelvic_pain

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 (27)

Cited by (17)

Source provenance

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