Abstract
Background: Endometriosis is a common gynecological disorder that causes inflammation and pelvic pain.
Endometriosis-related pain is best captured with patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures, however, assessment of
endometriosis-related pain in clinical trials has been difficult in the absence of a reliable and valid PRO instrument.
We describe the development of the Endometriosis Pain Daily Diary (EPDD), an electronic PRO developed as a
survey instrument to assess endometriosis-related pain and its impact on patients ’ lives.
Methods
The EPDD was initially developed on the basis of an existing Endometriosis Pain and Bleeding Diary, a
targeted review of relevant literature, clinical expert interviews, and open-ended (concept elicitation) patient
interviews in the United States (US) and Japan which captured patients ’ experience with endometriosis. Cognitive
interviews of patients with endometriosis were conducted to evaluate patient comprehension of the EPDD items. A
conceptual model of endometriosis was developed, and meetings with US and European regulatory authorities
provided feedback for validating the EPDD in the context of clinical trials. Translatability assessments of the EPDD
were conducted to confirm its appropriate interpretation and ease of completion across 17 languages.
Results
The iterative development progressed through three versions of the instrument. The EPDDv1 included 18
items relating to dysmenorrhea/pelvic pain, dyspareunia and sexual activity, bleeding, hot flashes, daily activities,
and use of rescue medication. The EPDDv2 was a larger 43-item survey tested in cognitive interviews and
subsequently revised to yield the current 11-item EPDDv3, consisting of five core items relating to dysmenorrhea,
non-menstrual pelvic pain, and dyspareunia, and six extension items relating to sexual activity, daily activities, and
use of rescue medication.
Conclusions
The EPDD is a PRO for the evaluation of endometriosis-related pain and its associated impacts on
patients’ lives. The EPDD represents an important step in providing a PRO that is relevant to patients with
endometriosis-related pain in the context of a clinical study setting (ie, fit-for-purpose), designed to evaluate pain
associated with endometriosis, including regulatory agency support for its further exploration in clinical trials.
Keywords
Endometriosis, Patient-reported outcome measures, Dysmenorrhea, Pelvic pain
* Correspondence:
[email protected]
1Astellas Pharma, Leiden, the Netherlands
Full list of author information is available at the end of the article
© The Author(s). 2018 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and
reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to
the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver
(http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
van Nooten et al. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes (2018) 16:3
DOI 10.1186/s12955-017-0819-1
Background
Endometriosis is a common gynecological disorder char-
acterized by the presence of endometrial glands and
tissue outside of the uterus, resulting in chronic inflam-
mation, dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia, and chronic pelvic
pain [1]. The prevalence of endometriosis ranges from 6
to 10% in the worldwide female population [2], and has
been shown to be associated with dysmenorrhea, dys-
pareunia, and chronic pain. Women with endometriosis
experience absenteeism and reduced overall work pro-
ductivity as a result of their condition, and have de-
monstrated reduced quality of life scores on the Short
Form-36 version 2. Additionally, among women in a
relationship, endometriosis can negatively impact part-
ner relationships [3, 4].
Endometriosis-related pain and its impact on patients ’
lives are best captured through the use of direct reports
from patients regarding their experience, that is, patient-
reported outcome (PRO) measures. PROs are widely
used in evaluating pain; three PROs are commonly used
in studies of endometriosis. The Composite Pelvic Signs
and Symptoms Score (CPSSS) is a modified version of
the Biberoglu and Behrman Scale [5] and measures
dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia, non-menstrual pelvic pain
(NMPP), pelvic tenderness, and pelvic induration. This
scale was developed on the basis of physician opinion,
without specific input from patients, and has a 28-day
recall period [6]. Given that responses to PRO items are
likely to be influenced by the patient ’s state at the time
of recall, the United States (US) Food and Drug Admin-
istration (FDA) PRO Guidance for Industry recom-
mends, in alignment with good measurement practices
[7, 8], that PROs have a recall period that is appropriate
to capture the patient ’s current or recent state [9].
Additionally, patient data are recorded by the physician
and thus the CPSSS is not a direct PRO. The Endometri-
osis Health Profile (EHP) is a PRO instrument that
measures the impact of endometriosis on patients ’ lives;
specifically, the EHP measures pain, control and power-
lessness, social support, emotional well-being, and self-
image [10 –13]. The EHP was designed to measure the
impact of endometriosis rather than specific symptoms
and has a 4-week recall period. The Endometriosis Pain
and Bleeding Diary (EPBD) [14] was developed to meas-
ure endometriosis symptoms. Although the EPBD was
developed on the basis of both patient and physician
input, and designed to collect information daily, the
instrument’s development was discontinued prior to
establishing that it was fit-for-purpose.
Thus, the CPSSS, EHP , and EPBD have their limitations
as a fit-for-purpose tool for evaluating endometriosis-
related pain in the context of supporting labeling claims of
a treatment benefit, as outlined in the US FDA PRO Gui-
dance for Industry [9]. Therefore, we have developed the
Endometriosis Pain Daily Diary (EPDD) as a fit-for-
purpose PRO instrument to assess pain and its impact
on patients ’ lives in clinical trials for women with
endometriosis-related pain.
Given its development process, the EPBD was an
appropriate starting place for the EPDD. The FDA
guidance emphasizes the importance of demonstrating
evidence of the relevance (ie, content validity) of the
PRO instrument to the target patient population, and
ensuring that the population studied in the PRO instru-
ment development and documentation process is com-
parable with that in the clinical study setting in which
the instrument is to be used (ie, that the instrument is
fit-for-purpose).
This paper describes the initial steps of the develop-
ment of the EPDD. Specifically, this paper describes the
process undertaken for establishing content validity of
the EPDD, providing evidence that it measures relevant
concepts and experiences relating to pain associated
with endometriosis, is homogenously interpretable, and
is easily comprehendible. The processes described herein
represent the first steps of development of an instrument
that is ‘fit-for-purpose’.
Methods
The EPDD was developed through a series of proce-
dures, including the development of an evidence-
supported conceptual model of disease, all of which
followed regulatory guidance set forth by the European
Medicines Agency ’s (EMA) Committee for Medicinal
Products for Human Use (CHMP) reflection paper on
the use of health-related quality of life measures in the
evaluation of medicinal products [15] and the FDA PRO
Guidance for Industry [9]. The recommendations in
these regulatory guidelines are aligned with good instru-
ment development practices [7, 8]. The development
process described herein encompasses all procedures
that took place in the development of the EPDD as a
content-valid PRO designed for the purpose of assessing
treatment response in clinical trials (Fig. 1).
The EPDD was designed to be administered using an
electronic platform, asking patients to record their
endometriosis-related pain experiences over the previous
24 h. To date, the EPDD has been administered using a
small hand-held electronic device that queries the
patient each evening for a recording. The device allows
patient compliance to be tracked and is designed to
minimize incomplete records, as the programming does
not allow patients to skip questions.
Development of the EPDDv1
The initial version of the EPDD (EPDDv1) was devel-
oped on the basis of the conceptual framework of the
existing Endometriosis Pain and Bleeding Diary (EPBD)
van Nooten et al. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes (2018) 16:3 Page 2 of 13
[14], available literature on endometriosis, and input
from outcomes research scientists and a clinical expert
from Europe (Fig. 1). In order for the EPDD to be imple-
mented in a phase 2 clinical trial of endometriosis
(TERRA; NCT01767090), cognitive interviews were
conducted to test for patient comprehension of the draft
items, language, instructions, and response options.
Specifically, the cognitive interviews were designed to
gain the patient ’s perception of the survey items (ie,
what the patient believes the question is asking) and
comprehension of terms (ie, what specific words and
phrases mean to the patient) [16]. Semi-structured, indi-
vidual, face-to-face interviews were conducted with 14
women from the US with surgically confirmed endomet-
riosis and consisted of patients completing the EPDDv1
and answering questions relating to the intent of the
questions and the interpretation of specific terms. Inter-
viewers were research scientists with training and exten-
sive experience conducting qualitative interviews with
patients across a number of therapeutic indications
including endometriosis and other areas of women ’s
health. In preparation for these studies, the interviewers
reviewed the content and purpose of semi-structured
interview guide questions with the authors and con-
ducted practice interviews with each other to become
familiar with interview content and flow. Near the end
of the interview, the patient ’s acceptance of the elec-
tronic platform was assessed with a brief series of ques-
tions assessing ease of use, ease of response selection,
acceptability of the electronic platform and any
problems using the electronic platform. The information
obtained from these exercises was used to inform the
finalization of the EPDDv1. The EPDDv1 was then
translated and linguistically validated in 12 languages
(including English) to ensure conceptual equivalency of
the survey items in the 10 countries that enrolled
patients for the global phase 2 TERRA study. Prior to
translation, all language was reviewed for any potential
modification that would be required to ensure that the
conceptual basis of each question would be retained.
The translation and linguistic validation followed
internationally accepted standards set forth by the Inter-
national Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes
Research and consisted of seven processes: 1) a dual
forward translation was performed by two independent
native-speaking translators; 2) a third native-speaking
linguist assessed the translations and reconciled any
discrepancies between the two translations; 3) a native
speaker with proficiency in English performed a back
translation to ensure that the forward translation was
conceptually equivalent to the original; 4) a medical
review was conducted to ensure that the survey items
were appropriate for a clinical setting; 5) cognitive test-
ing of the EPDDv1 was conducted on a small group of
relevant patients with endometriosis in order to test
alternative wording and to check understandability,
interpretation, and cultural relevance of the translation;
6) a review of cognitive testing results compared the
patients’ interpretation of the translation with the
original version to highlight and amend discrepancies
Development of the EPDDv1
Clinical expertise, expert knowledge of endometriosis
literature, input from outcomes research scientists
and a clinical expert from Europe
Conceptual framework of the Endometriosis Pain and
Bleeding Diary
Cognitive interviews with patients from the US (n = 14)
Translation and linguistic validation (12 languages)
EPDDv1 Launched in
Phase 2 Trial
Item Refinement and Generation Meeting
Targeted literature review
Telephone interviews with clinical experts
in endometriosis (n = 5)
Concept elicitation interviews with patients
from the US (n = 17) and Japan (n = 17)
Revision of the EPDDv1 and
Development of the EPDDv2
Cognitive interviews with patients from the US (n = 16) and Japan (n = 15)
Translatability assessment (17 languages)
Item refinement and generation meeting
Cognitive Testing of the EPDDv2 and
Development of EPDDv3
EPDDv3
Conceptual Disease
Model of Endometriosis
Fig. 1 Development Process of the EPDD
van Nooten et al. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes (2018) 16:3 Page 3 of 13
and finalize the translation; 7) the final step was proof-
reading and final review of the translation [17].
Revision of the EPDDv1 and development of the EPDDv2
Following the launch of the phase 2 TERRA study
that employed the EPDDv1, the tool was further
evaluated for content validity using updated literature
reviews, clinician interviews, and additional, semi-
structured patient interviews. This three-step process
was designed to evaluate whether items needed to be
modified or deleted, or if additional items should be
added to the EPDDv1. The following three steps
(Fig. 1) were:
/C15A targeted literature review to identify the most
important and relevant symptoms and impacts
related to endometriosis. The MEDLINE database
was searched for human studies published in
English; search terms included targeted phrases such
as ‘endometriosis sign’, ‘endometriosis symptom’,
‘endometriosis impact ’, ‘endometriosis’ and ‘quality
of life ’, ‘Activities of Daily Living (ADL) ’, ‘interview’,
and ‘focus group ’.
/C15Individual interviews with five clinical experts in
endometriosis to collect further input regarding
important and relevant health concepts (ie, signs,
symptoms, side-effects, impacts) for women with
endometriosis.
/C15Concept elicitation interviews with adult women in
the US and Japan to identify and confirm the
symptom and impact concepts from the EPDDv1
that were the most important and relevant to
women with endometriosis-related pain. Patients
from the US ( n = 17) were recruited if they were
aged 18 –45 years and had surgically confirmed
diagnosis of endometriosis within 5 years. Patients
from Japan ( n = 17) were recruited if they were aged
20–45 years with a diagnosis of endometriosis;
because surgical diagnosis is uncommon in Japan,
surgical diagnosis was not required if diagnosis was
confirmed by a blood test, internal examination, or a
magnetic resonance imaging or computed
tomography scan. During the interviews, patients
were first asked to spontaneously report any
symptoms they experienced as a result of
endometriosis, and thereafter were asked if they
experienced any specific symptoms from a predefined
list of symptoms known to be associated with
endometriosis (based on literature and expert input).
The digital audio files from the patient concept elicit-
ation interviews were transcribed into document files
and loaded into the ATLAS.ti (version 5.0) software pro-
gram for coding [18]. Data coding methodology followed
a three-step process. First, the coder identified each inci-
dence of a concept expression in the transcript text.
Second, the coder highlighted the actual patient quote
as the assigned code name and then matched the tagged
text to a code stem from the coding framework, allowing
it to be grouped with other codes of similar content
related to the project ’s objectives. If a code stem did not
exist in the coding framework, a new one was developed
and the coding framework was expanded; any code
stems not used were removed when the coding diction-
ary was finalized. Third, the final coding dictionary was
the result of the full set of concept codes identified in
the patient transcripts, organized by the overall structure
of the coding framework so the results could be related
to the project objectives. All descriptive data from the
screening form were entered into SPSS (version 11.5) to
generate tables of descriptive statistics.
Information obtained from these exercises resulted in
the development of a conceptual disease model of endo-
metriosis. This conceptual disease model served to facili-
tate an item refinement and generation meeting, during
which the EPDDv1 was updated to include relevant fin-
dings from the literature review and patient and expert
interviews. The outcome of the item refinement and
generation meeting was the EPDDv2.
Cognitive testing of the EPDDv2 and development of the
EPDDv3
The EPDDv2 was tested in additional cognitive inter-
views with patients. Patients with endometriosis from
the US ( n = 16) and Japan ( n = 15) were identified via
clinical record review (US) and patient self-reporting
(Japan), and subsequently recruited and screened at
three US centers (Spokane, WA; Seattle, WA; New
Orleans, LA) and one market research firm in Tokyo,
Japan, to participate in the cognitive interviews. Patients
completed the EPDDv2 and participated in face-to-face
individual semi-structured interviews.
Following minor refinements made during and follow-
ing the cognitive interviews, a translatability assessment
was conducted to identify and rectify any major concep-
tual issues to ensure appropriate interpretation of the
EPDDv3 and address any potential concerns regarding
cross-cultural adaptation before its potential use in pi-
votal trials. Independent translators assessed the trans-
latability of the 11-item EPDDv3 in 17 languages
(Bulgarian, Dutch, English, French, German, Hungarian,
Italian, Korean, Polish, Portuguese, Romanian, Russian,
Simplified Chinese, Traditional Chinese, and Spanish
[for Spain, US, and Argentina]) among 19 countries.
When countries/languages are selected for the pivotal
trials, the full translation and linguistic validation
process would be conducted for each language. Overall,
van Nooten et al. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes (2018) 16:3 Page 4 of 13
Results
from the translatability assessment demonstrated
that the EPDDv3 is a robust tool and has utility among
all translated languages. No significant issues were
identified. Furthermore, additional regulatory feedback was
obtained from the FDA and the EMA and a second item
refinement and generation meeting was held during which
the current version of the EPDD (EPDDv3) was developed.
Results
Development of the EPDDv1
The EPDDv1 included 18 items in six categories: pelvic
pain (including dysmenorrhea and NMPP), dyspareunia
and sexual activity, bleeding, hot flashes, daily activities,
and rescue medication/protection. The EPDDv1 was
developed to be administered electronically with a 24-h
recall period. In the phase 2 TERRA trial, it was imple-
mented with a small hand-held device.
Semi-structured cognitive interviews for EPDDv1
A total of 14 patients from the US participated in
the face-to-face, semi-structured cognitive interviews
in three waves, with 4 –5 patients in each wave.
During the first wave, wording modifications were
made to two instructions and 7 items of the
EPDDv1. During the second wave, wording modifica-
tions were made to one item. No modifications were
made during the third wave. Demographic data are
presented in Table 1. Results from the Technology
Ease of Use Questionnaire indicated that the partici-
pating patients found the electronic hand-held device
d i s p l a y i n gt h eE P D D v 1t ob ee a s yt ou s ea n dw e l l
understood (T able 2).
Revision of the EPDDv1; development of EPDDv2
Targeted literature review
A total of 30 peer-reviewed articles were retrieved from
the search; seven articles contained qualitative data. Five
types of pain were identified, and bleeding and gastro-
intestinal disturbance were also highlighted as being
related to endometriosis.
Clinical expert interviews
Five clinical experts were recruited from Europe
(United Kingdom, n =1 ; G e r m a n y ,n = 2) and Japan
(n = 2) and completed a semi-structured interview.
Interviews with the Japanese experts were conducted
in English via typed text to minimize language misin-
terpretation. All five clinical experts highlighted the
key symptom of endometriosis as pain; specifically,
pain during menstruation, NMPP , pain during and
after sexual intercourse, and pain during defecation.
Pain during or after sexual intercourse was more
associated with ‘deep’ pain rather than ‘superficial ’
Table 1 Demographics for US Patient Cognitive Interviews for
the EPDDv1
Characteristic US (N = 14)
Age, years Mean (SD) 34.1 (6.8)
Highest level of
education completed
High school 3 (21.4)
Some college 6 (42.9)
Bachelor’s degree 2 (14.3)
Graduate or
professional school
3 (21.4)
Ethnicity White/Caucasian
(non-Hispanic)
13 (92.9)
White/Caucasian
(Hispanic)
0
Black/African
American
1 (7.1)
Hispanic or Latino 0
General health Excellent 1 (7.1)
Very good 6 (42.9)
Good 5 (35.7)
Fair 2 (14.3)
Poor 0
Over past month,
endometriosis-related
pain severity during menstruation
(0 = no pain to
10 = worst pain imaginable)
Mean (SD) 7.2 (1.7)
Over past month,
endometriosis-related
pain severity not during menstruation
(0 = no pain to
10 = worst pain imaginable)
Mean (SD) 5.8 (1.6)
All data are presented as n (%) unless otherwise noted
Table 2 Technology Ease of Use Questionnaire – Results from
US Patient Cognitive Interviews for the EPDDv1
Questionnaire Item Response Item n (%)
How easy/difficult did you
find using the electronic
questionnaire?
Very easy 6 (42.9)
Quite easy 3 (21.4)
Very difficult –
Missinga 5 (35.7)
The choices that were there
to use when I answered
the questions were:
Easy to read on the screen,
no problem choosing
my response
8 (57.1)
A little difficult to read on
the screen, and I had some
difficulty in choosing
my response
1 (7.1)
Missinga 5 (35.7)
Overall, did you find the
electronic questionnaire
acceptable to use?
Yes 9 (64.3)
No –
Missinga 5 (35.7)
aThe Technology Ease of Use Questionnaire was inadvertently not
administered to one wave of cognitive interviews (5 patients)
van Nooten et al. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes (2018) 16:3 Page 5 of 13
pain. A less common symptom not related to pain
was bleeding. All clinical experts stated that a primary
concern related to endometriosis is infertility. The
most common impacts on patients ’ daily lives, as
perceived by clinical experts, were role functioning,
especially attendance at work and school, performance
of daily activities, sexual function, and partner rela-
tionships; missed work/school was consistently re-
ported as having the greatest impact.
Concept elicitation interviews
A total of 34 female patients were recruited from six US
clinical sites and one Japanese market research firm;
demographic data are presented in Table 3.
Concepts that are spontaneously expressed during the
open-ended portions of the interview can be considered
to be of higher importance or relevance to the patient
than those expressed as a result of probing by the inter-
viewer. Among US patients, the most common symp-
toms associated with endometriosis were ‘pain during
menstruation’ and ‘NMPP’, both spontaneously reported
by 82.4% (14 of 17) of patients who reported these
symptoms (Table 4). Among Japanese patients, the most
common symptoms associated with endometriosis were
the same, with ‘pain during menstruation ’ and ‘NMPP’
spontaneously reported by 100% (17 of 17) and 76.5%
(13 of 17) of patients who reported these symptoms,
respectively (Table 4).
The most common impacts associated with endomet-
riosis were ‘problems doing physical activities ’, spontan-
eously reported by 70.6% of US patients ( n = 17) and
64.7% of Japanese patients ( n =1 7 ) , a n d‘having prob-
lems at work ’, spontaneously reported by 58.8% of US
patients and 41.2% of Japanese patients. Japanese
patients also commonly reported ‘dropping other daily
activities’ (41.2%) (Table 5).
Integrated findings
Table 6 summarizes the findings from all three sources
of evidence, the literature review, and the clinician and
patient interviews. The findings show that there was
consistency from all three sources with regard to types
of pain, but less overlap with other symptoms and their
impact on patients ’ lives.
Conceptual model of disease
Analysis of data obtained from the concept evaluation
exercises (ie, literature review, expert interviews, and
patient interviews) informed a conceptual model of
disease (Fig. 2), which served to facilitate the item
refinement and generation meeting. The conceptual
model of endometriosis includes symptom concepts
related to pain and vaginal bleeding during defecation
and gastrointestinal disturbances, and expands on
impacts relating to sleep disturbances, physical func-
tioning limitations, and social functioning limitations.
During the item refinemen ta n dg e n e r a t i o nm e e t i n g ,
the EPDDv2 was developed based on this conceptual
model to be fully comprehensive. The EPDDv2 con-
sisted of 43 items comprising revised iterations of the
original 18 items of the EPDDv1 and an additional 24
items related to pain/bleeding during defecation,
gastrointestinal disturbance, and difficulties with func-
tioning and/or sleep.
Cognitive testing of the EPDDv2; development of the
EPDDv3
Patients were recruited and screened at three US centers
(Spokane, WA; Seattle, WA; New Orleans, LA) and
through a market research firm in Tokyo, Japan. The
cognitive interviews were conducted in four waves in the
US and three waves in Japan. Patient demographics are
presented in Table 7.
The EPDDv2 items were tested in three waves of
cognitive interviews in the US, and wording modifica-
tions were made to items after each wave. During
Wave 1 (US), wording modifications were made to
three items pertaining to pain, sexual intercourse and
pain, and bleeding; no items were added or removed.
During Wave 2 (US), wording modifications were
made to one item, and alternate questions for nine
items were proposed and tested in Wave 3. During
Wave 3 (US), one item was removed from the survey,
and an alternate question was proposed for one other
item for further testing.
The EPDDv2 was then translated to Japanese and
tested in two waves of interviews in Japan. The
Japanese translation was slightly modified after each
wave to ensure the accuracy and understandability of
the language used. Based on Japanese patient feed-
back, translation modifications were necessary for the
phrases ‘deep pain or penetration ’, ‘spotting’, ‘social
activities ’,s e x u a l ‘interest’,a n d ‘during the past 24 h ’,
which are not common terminology in Japan. Four
items were evaluated and found to be better under-
stood by patients and subsequently replaced the
original items.
Following the two waves of interviews in Japan, and
based on feedback from the FDA and EMA regarding
the length of the survey, the EPDDv2 was reduced from
43 to 11 items consisting of five core items relating to
dysmenorrhea, NMPP , and dyspareunia, and six ex-
tended items relating to sexual activity, daily activities,
and use of rescue medication, yielding the EPDDv3. This
11-item EPDDv3 was evaluated in a third wave of inter-
views in Japan and the fourth wave of interviews in the
US. During Wave 3 of the Japanese interviews,
van Nooten et al. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes (2018) 16:3 Page 6 of 13
Table 3 Demographics for US and Japanese Patient Concept Elicitation Interviews
Characteristic US (N = 17) Japan ( N = 17)
Age, years Mean (SD) 30.5 (6.6) 41.1 (5.0)
Marital status Married 5 (29.4) 13 (76.5)
Living with partner 4 (23.5) 0
Divorced 2 (11.7) 2 (11.8)
Never married 6 (35.2) 2 (11.8)
Highest level of education completed High school 1 (5.9) 1 (5.9)
Some college 8 (47.1) 8 (47.1)
Bachelor’s degree 3 (17.6) 7 (41.2)
Graduate or professional school 5 (29.4) 1 (5.9)
Current employment status Not employed outside of home 2 (11.8) 2 (11.8)
Employed full-time 8 (47.1) 6 (35.3)
Employed part-time 3 (17.6) 1 (5.9)
Retired 0 1 (5.9)
Not employed 4 (23.5) 7 (41.2)
Ethnicity White/Caucasian (non-Hispanic) 14 (82.4) –
White/Caucasian (Hispanic) 2 (11.7) –
Hispanic or Latino 1 (5.9) –
General health Excellent 0 1 (5.9)
Very good 6 (35.2) 4 (23.5)
Good 8 (47.0) 8 (47.1)
Fair 3 (17.6) 4 (23.5)
Over past month, endometriosis-related pain
severity during menstruation
(0 = no pain to 10 = worst pain imaginable)
Mean (SD) 7.3 (1.5) 6.9 (1.9)
Median 7.0 7.0
Range 4 –10 5 –10
Over past month, endometriosis-related pain
severity not during menstruation
(0 = no pain to 10 = worst pain imaginable)
Mean (SD) 5.9 (1.4) 3.2 (2.3)
Median 5.0 3.0
Range 4 –90 –7
All data are presented as n (%) unless otherwise noted
Table 4 Symptoms Associated With Endometriosis
Symptom Spontaneous Probed Not Affected Not reported
US Japan US Japan US Japan US Japan
Pain during menstruation 14 (82.4) 17 (100) 2 (11.7) –– – 1 (5.9) –
NMPP 14 (82.4) 13 (76.5) 2 (11.7) 2 (11.8) – 1 (5.9) 1 (5.9) 1 (5.9)
Superficial vaginal pain during sexual intercourse 1 (5.9) 1 (5.9) –– 15 (88.2) 16 (94.1) 1 (5.9)
Deep vaginal pain during sexual intercourse 1 (5.9) – 2 (11.7) 9 (52.9) 10 (58.8) 7 (41.2) 4 (23.5) 1 (5.9)
Superficial vaginal pain after sexual intercourse 1 (5.9) – 1 (5.9) 1 (5.9) – 15 (88.2) 15 (88.2) 1 (5.9)
Deep vaginal pain after sexual intercourse 3 (17.6) 1 (5.9) 7 (41.2) 4 (23.5) 3 (17.6) 10 (58.8) 4 (23.5) 2 (11.8)
Other symptomsa 10 (58.8) 3 (17.6) NA –– – 7 (41.2) 14 (82.4)
All data are presented as n (%)
NMPP, non-menstrual pelvic pain
aOther symptoms spontaneously offered by US patients: ache in lower back; back aches; bloating; bowel; dull achy; exhaustion; headache; heavy menstrual flow;
heavy periods; hot flashes/night sweats; lower back ache; nausea; ovary in pain before sex; pain after sexual intercourse in pelvic area; painful bowel movements;
rectal bleeding; sharp stabbing pain left lower abdomen; stabbing pain around right ovary; vomiting; and warming sensation
Other symptoms spontaneously offered by Japanese patients: watching TV suddenly have pain (pain at all times); heaviness lie on side lower back (stomach);
heavy bleeding/anemia/dizzy/squeezing pain in stomach-used to be around back feel that uterus being pulled down (clots)
van Nooten et al. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes (2018) 16:3 Page 7 of 13
translation modifications were made to 12 items and
wording modifications were made to two items. During
Wave 4 of the US interviews, all patients confirmed
comprehension of all items. After the final wave of inter-
views, the EPDDv3 was sent for translation and linguis-
tic validation into 17 languages (including Japanese).
The EPDDv3 is displayed in Table 8, and a comparison
of the items included in the EPDDv1 and EPDDv2 is
displayed in Table 9.
Discussion
In the absence of a fit-for-purpose PRO for the measure-
ment of endometriosis-related pain, we developed an
instrument to support evaluation of biopharmaceutical
products and to measure key signs and symptoms associ-
ated with endometriosis. To accomplish this, a conceptual
model of endometriosis and the EPDD was developed on
the basis of three sources of evidence: a structured litera-
ture review, clinical expert opinion, and qualitative patient
concept elicitation interviews. In addition, translation and
linguistic validation and patient cognitive interviews facili-
tated the refinement of the items to ensure patient com-
prehension and understanding, as well as the ability to
respond to items as intended. Through these exercises,
the items of the EPDD were revised and refined to ensure
relevance to patient pain experience as well as compre-
hension by patients as intended. Translation and testing
in Japanese patients allowed for development of a harmo-
nized instrument.
The EPDD resulting from this content validity work
consists of five core items relating to dysmenorrhea,
NMPP , and dyspareunia, and six extended items relating
Table 5 Impacts Associated With Endometriosis
Symptom Spontaneous Probed Not Affected Missing
US Japan US Japan US Japan US Japan
Problems doing physical activities 12 (70.6) 11 (64.7) 4 (23.5) 2 (11.8) 1 (5.9) 1 (5.9) – 3 (17.6)
Affecting other daily activities 6 (35.3) 7 (41.2) 7 (41.2) 7 (41.2) 4 (23.5) 2 (11.8) – 1 (5.9)
Experience difficulties during or after sexual intercourse
(changes in relationship with partner)
8 (47.1) 7 (41.2) 5 (29.4) 5 (29.4) 4 (23.5) 4 (23.5) – 1 (5.9)
Doing fewer social activities
(seeing friends and acquaintances less often)
9 (52.9) 2 (11.8) 7 (41.2) 2 (11.8) 1 (5.9) 12 (70.6) – 1 (5.9)
Having problems doing your daily chores at home
(cleaning, cooking, house maintenance)
3 (17.6) 4 (23.5) 10 (58.8) 10 (58.8) 4 (23.5) 2 (11.8) – 1 (5.9)
Having problems at work
(with people or with getting your work completed)
10 (58.8) 6 (35.3) 3 (17.6) 8 (47.1) 4 (23.5) 2 (11.8) – 1 (5.9)
Other impactsa 12 (70.6) 10 (58.8) NA –– – 5 (29.4) 7 (41.2)
All data are presented as n (%)
aOther impacts spontaneously offered by US patients: avoid work out; competitive runner; depression; family life (taking care of her daughter); fatigue; fertility –
ability to have children; having another child; irritable relationship; lifting children; limit time away from home; low libido; medical issue stomach; school; sleep;
sleep a lot; thinking about having hysterectomy; and tiredness
Other impacts spontaneously offered by Japanese patients: bowel movement; [have] to stay in bed for 2 days; can ’t [fall] asleep; financial travel plan; avoid those
times (intercourse pain, ovulation period, bowel movement pain); [have] to take a day off in school (past); lying down (sideways); lying down; have to rest; leave
her alone not to be disturbed; not able to sit; prefer to stay in bed; cannot keep standing especially on Day 1
Table 6 Key Concepts Identified in Literature, and Expert and
Patient Interviews
Concept Literature
Review
Expert
Interviews
Patient
Interviews
Pain during menstruation ✓✓ ✓
Pain during/after sexual intercourse ✓✓ ✓
Pain unrelated to sex and/or
menstruation (pelvic, back,
general, headache)
✓✓ ✓
Pain during defecation ✓✓ ✓
Pain during urination ✓
Other non-pain symptoms
(bloating, dizziness, nausea, vomiting)
✓
Infertility ✓
Bleeding (during menstruation, sex,
or irregular)
✓✓
Gastrointestinal disturbance
(diarrhea, constipation, flatulence)
✓
Work/school limitations ✓✓ ✓
Sexual activity limitations ✓✓ ✓
Difficulty doing daily activities ✓✓ ✓
Difficulty doing leisure activities ✓✓
Physical activity limitations ✓✓
Social/lifestyle limitations ✓✓
Relationships affected ✓✓ ✓
Emotional health ✓✓ ✓
Sleep difficulties ✓
Low energy difficulties ✓
Coping behaviors ✓
van Nooten et al. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes (2018) 16:3 Page 8 of 13
to sexual activity, daily activities, and use of pain medi-
cation, and will serve as a daily, electronic, patient-
reported measure of endometriosis-related pain. In
particular, the instrument was designed and developed
for the purpose of detecting a treatment response in the
context of drug development. Content validity of the
EPDD was demonstrated via a rigorous process consis-
ting of several waves of cognitive interviews. In addition,
the translatability assessment confirmed its utility in 17
languages, allowing for the potential use of the EPDD in
global clinical trials in endometriosis. The 17 languages
included in the translatability assessment were chosen
based on anticipated countries that would be selected
for enrollment in future phase 3 clinical trials. If any of
those countries/languages are selected, then a full
translation and linguistic validation process would be
conducted for each language. The phase 2 TERRA study,
a double-blind, randomized, parallel-group, placebo-
controlled clinical trial, used the EPDD to assess the
efficacy of a GnRH receptor antagonist, ASP1707, in
women with endometriosis-associated pelvic pain. To
determine a clinically meaningful threshold of improve-
ment, as measured by the EPDD, anchor-based analyses
of the degrees of improvement in endometriosis-related
pain on the Patient Global Impression of Change, the
Brief Pain Inventory, the modified Biberoglu and
Behrman, and the European quality of life 5-dimension
5-level scale were performed using the EPDDv1. Results
suggested that an improvement of 60% (for overall pelvic
pain and NMPP) and 70% (for dysmenorrhea), as mea-
sured by the EPDD, would be considered clinically
meaningful (TERRA; NCT01767090). The successful
completion of this study, which achieved its primary
endpoint of reducing endometriosis-associated pelvic
pain after 12 weeks of treatment, demonstrates the in-
ternal validity and reliability of the EPDDv1 in a clinical
trial context.
The PRO reported here has three key advantages
over existing measures. First, to our knowledge, the
EPDD is the only PRO for endometriosis-related pain
that was developed in accordance with guidance set
Signs/Symptoms
Bleeding & Spotting
Related to menstruation
Menorrhagia
Oligomenorrhea
Polymenorrhea
Not related to menstruation
During/after intercourse
During/after defecation
Target Patient Population
Patients with
endometriosis-related pain
Disease Process
Endometriosis is a condition
in which endometrial tissue
grows outside the uterus.
These extra-uterine implants
respond to endogenous cyclic
hormone fluctuations, which
induce menstrual bleeding of
the implants and lead to
chronic inflammation.
Impacts
Endometriosis-associated pain
Menstrual pain
Non -menstrual pain
– Pain associated with sexual intercourse
(during/after)
– Pain associated with defecation
(during/after)
– Other non-menstrual pain
Intermittent/periodic & continuous/constant
Pelvic area pain & non-pelvic area pain
Infertility
Physical functioning limitations
(including sexual functioning)
Role functioning limitations
(including ADL, work)
Emotional functioning limitations
(including depression/anxiety,
stress, self-esteem)
Social functioning limitations
(including leisure activities, sexual
partner(s), other relationships)
Sleep difficulties
Tired/low
energy
Mood
changes
Concen-
tration
Fig. 2 Conceptual Model of Endometriosis
Note: Symptoms not related to pain (eg, bleeding, hot flashes, infertility) and impacts not expected to change week by week were not included
in the EPDDv3 based on regulatory feedback and additional decisions made in a final item refinement and generation meeting held prior to the
development of EPDDv3. ADL, activities of daily living
Table 7 Demographics for US and Japanese Patient Cognitive
Interviews for the EPDDv2
Characteristic US (N = 16) Japan ( N =1 5 )
Age, years Mean (SD) 33.2 (6.3) 34.9 (6.4)
Median 33.0 35.0
Range 24–43 24 –44
Highest level of
education completed
High school – 7 (46.7%)
Some college 9 (56.3%) 3 (20.0%)
Bachelor’s degree 5 (31.3%) 5 (33.3%)
Graduate or
professional school
2 (12.5%) –
Worst endometriosis-
related pain during
menstruation: (0 = no
pain to 10 = worst pain
imaginable)
Mean (SD) 8.0 (1.2) 7.5 (1.6)
Median 8.0 8.0
Range 6–10 4 –10
Worst endometriosis-
related pain when not
menstruating: (0 = no
pain to 10 = worst
pain imaginable)
Mean (SD) 5.6 (1.7) 4.8 (2.9)
Median 5.5 5.0
Range 2–90 –9
van Nooten et al. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes (2018) 16:3 Page 9 of 13
forth by the EMA and FDA. Second, the electronic
format allows for convenient, real-time completion of
the instrument by the patient, without the require-
ment for involvement of investigative research site
staff. Third, the requirement for daily entry ensures
accurate data collection and precludes inaccuracies
associated with lengthy recall periods. Conversely,
Limitations
of the EPDD are noteworthy and should
be considered. As the instrument was designed specif-
ically for use in clinical trials for the assessment of
patient response to treatment, important items relat-
ing to patient personal experience with endometriosis
(ie, work impairment, hot flashes, impact on sleep)
were removed from the final version. In addition, the
EPDD does not address pain during defecation or exer-
cise, or other non-pain symptoms that are important to
patients, such as bloating, dizziness, nausea, vomiting,
difficulties with physical functioning, work/school li-
mitations, relationship interference, or emotional func-
tioning (although many of these were measured in the
interim EPDDv2). Together, these characteristics limit the
use of the EPDD within clinical practice; however, oppor-
tunities exist for expansion of the EPDD to broaden its
clinical application.
Although the EPDDv3 can be considered content
valid, the remaining psych ometric properties of the
instrument, including reliability, construct validity,
and ability to detect change have not been
established. Such psychometric data and quantitative
validation can be obtained through the administra-
tion of the EPDD with other validated PRO
measures (eg, Patient Global Impression of Change)
in a longitudinal intervention study, and are required
for endorsement (eg, FDA) of the EPDD as fit-for-
Table 8 Full Version of the EPDDv3
# Item / instruction Response options Logic
EPDDv3 (core)
1 The first questions are about vaginal bleeding or spotting that could happen during your period or between periods
1a During the past 24 h, did you have any vaginal bleeding or spotting? Checklist:
Yes or No
If no, go to Section 2
1b During the past 24 h, have you been on your period? Checklist:
Yes or No
n/a
2 The next question is about pain. Please be sure to think only about pain related to your endometriosis when answering this question.
2a During the past 24 h, at its worst, how severe was your endometriosis-related pain? Numeric rating scale:
0 (No pain) to 10
(worst pain imaginable)
n/a
3 The next questions are about sexual activity and pain. When answering, think only about pain that occurs during vaginal penetration.
3a During the past 24 h, did you engage in any sexual activity that involved full vaginal
penetration?
Checklist:
Yes or No
If no, go to item 3c
3b During the past 24 h, at its worst, how would you rate your level (degree) of pain felt
during or following vaginal penetration?
Numeric rating scale:
0 (No pain) to 10
(worst pain imaginable)
n/a
Note: Question only asked if
answer to question 3a is yes
EPDDv3 (extended)
3c During the past 24 h, did you choose not to have any sexual activity that involved
full vaginal penetration for any reason, even though you had the chance?
Checklist:
Yes or No
If no, go to item 3e
3d During the past 24 h, did you choose not to have any sexual activity that involved
full vaginal penetration because of your endometriosis?
Checklist:
Yes or No
n/a
Note: Question only asked if
answer to question 3c is yes
3e During the past 24 h, did your desire toward sexual intimacy decrease due to your
endometriosis?
Checklist:
Yes or No
n/a
4 The following questions are about your daily activities during the past 24 h.
4a During the past 24 h, how difficult has it been to do your daily activities? Numeric rating scale:
0 (not difficult) to 10
(extremely difficult)
n/a
5 On the next screens you will be asked to record the medication you took for your endometriosis-related pain.
5a During the past 24 h, did you use your rescue medication for your endometriosis-
related pain?
Checklist:
Yes or No
If yes, go to item 5b
If no, end
5b During the past 24 h, how many tablets of your rescue medication did you use? Spinner range 0 –20 n/a
Note: Screen only displayed if
answer to question 5a is yes
van Nooten et al. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes (2018) 16:3 Page 10 of 13
Table 9 Items of the EPDD v1 and v2
EPDDv1 EPDDv2
Pelvic pain (including dysmenorrhea & NMPP)
During the past 24 h, did you have any vaginal bleeding or spotting? During the past 24 h, did you have any vaginal bleeding or spotting?
During the past 24 h, have you been menstruating (vaginal bleeding or
spotting during your period)?
During the past 24 h, have you been menstruating (vaginal bleeding or
spotting during your period)?
During the past 24 h, at its worst, how severe was your endometriosis-
related pain?
During the past 24 h, at its worst, how severe was your endometriosis-
related pain?
– Was the pain you experienced during the past 24 h:
1. Stable (constant pain that doesn ’t change much, and never pain free).
2. Intermittent (I feel pain sometimes, but other times I ’m pain-free)
3. Variable ( “background” pain all the time, but sometimes pain is worse
than at other times)
Dyspareunia and sexual activity
During the past 24 h, did you have sexual intercourse or engage in any
sexual activity that involved full vaginal penetration?
During the past 24 h, did you have sexual intercourse or engage in any
other sexual activity that involved full vaginal penetration?
During the past 24 h, at its worst, how would you rate your level
(degree) of pain at the entrance of the vagina during or following
vaginal penetration?
During the past 24 h, at its worst, how would you rate your level
(degree) of pain at the entrance of the vagina during or following
vaginal penetration?
During the past 24 h, at its worst, how would you rate your level
(degree) of pain felt DEEP in your vagina during or following DEEP
vaginal penetration?
During the past 24 h, at its worst, how would you rate your level
(degree) of pain felt DEEP in your body during or following DEEP
vaginal penetration?
– During the past 24 h, did you avoid sexual intercourse?
During the past 24 h, did you avoid sexual intercourse because of
your endometriosis?
You said you avoided sexual intercourse in the past 24 h. During the past
24 h, did you avoid sexual intercourse because of your endometriosis?
– During the past 24 h, did you feel a decreased interest in sexual intimacy?
Pain during defecation
– During the past 24 h, did you have one or more bowel movements?
– During the past 24 h, at its worst, how severe was the pain when you
had a bowel movement?
Bleeding
You said you had been menstruating during the past 24 h. On average,
how heavy was this bleeding or spotting compared to your usual
menstruation?
You said you had been menstruating during the past 24 h. On average,
how heavy was this bleeding or spotting compared to your usual
menstruation?
During the past 24 h, did you have any vaginal bleeding or spotting
related to sexual activity that involved full vaginal penetration?
During the past 24 h, did you have any vaginal bleeding or spotting
related to sexual activity that involved full vaginal penetration?
You said you had vaginal bleeding or spotting related to sexual activity
during the past 24 h. On average, how heavy was this bleeding or
spotting compared to your usual menstruation?
You said you had vaginal bleeding or spotting related to sexual activity
during the past 24 h. On average, how heavy was this bleeding or
spotting compared to your usual menstruation?
– During the past 24 h, did you have any vaginal bleeding or spotting
related to one or more bowel movements?
– You said you had vaginal bleeding or spotting related to one or more
bowel movements during the past 24 h. On average, how heavy was this
bleeding or spotting compared to your usual menstruation?
During the past 24 h, did you have any vaginal bleeding or spotting,
not related to menstruation? (Please do not include vaginal bleeding or
spotting related to sexual activity that involved full vaginal penetration)
During the past 24 h, did you have any other vaginal bleeding or
spotting, not related to menstruation? (Please do not include vaginal
bleeding or spotting related to bowel movements or sexual activity that
involved full vaginal penetration)
You said you had other vaginal bleeding or spotting during the past
24 h that was not due to your period or sexual activity or bowel
movements. On average, how heavy was this bleeding or spotting
compared to your usual menstruation?
You said you had other vaginal bleeding or spotting during the past
24 h that was not due to your period or sexual activity or bowel
movements. On average, how heavy was this bleeding or spotting
compared to your usual menstruation?
Hot flashes
During the past 24 h, did you have any hot flashes? During the past 24 h, did you have any hot flashes?
During the past 24 h, how many hot flashes did you have? During the past 24 h, how many hot flashes did you have?
van Nooten et al. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes (2018) 16:3 Page 11 of 13
purpose for use in clinical trials of endometriosis
interventions.
Conclusions
The EPDD is a PRO for the evaluation of endometriosis-
related pain. The EPDD represents an important step in
providing an effective PRO to evaluate pain associated
with endometriosis and its related impacts on patients.
Abbreviations
ADL: activities of daily living; CHMP: Committee for Medicinal Products for
Human Use; CPSSS: Composite Pelvic Signs and Symptoms Score;
EHP: Endometriosis Health Profile; EMA: European Medicines Agency;
EPBD: Endometriosis Pain and Bleeding Diary; EPDD: Endometriosis Pain
Daily Diary; FDA: Food and Drug Administration; NMPP: non-menstrual pelvic
pain; PRO: patient-reported outcome; US: United States
Acknowledgments
We thank SuccinctChoice Medical Communications (Chicago, IL) for medical
writing and editorial assistance funded by Astellas Pharma Inc.
Funding
This study was performed and funded by Astellas Pharma Inc.
Availability of data and materials
All data supporting the results and conclusions presented herein are
included in this published article.
Authors’ contributions
All authors made substantial contributions to the study design. JC, FEVN, CAE,
and JP: acquisition of data. JC, FEVN, MR, and CAE: analysis and interpretation of
the data. All authors were involved in drafting of the manuscript or revising it
critically for important intellectual content, approved the final version to be
published, and agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring
that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are
appropriately investigated and resolved.
Ethics approval and consent to participate
Institutional review board approval for the study protocol, the informed
consent form, and data collection forms for interviews with patients in the
US was provided by Quorum Review (Seattle, WA).
Consent for publication
Not applicable.
Table 9 Items of the EPDD v1 and v2 (Continued)
EPDDv1 EPDDv2
Daily activities
During the past 24 h, how much did your endometriosis-related pain
interfere with your daily activities?
During the past 24 h, how difficult has it been to do your daily activities ?
– During the past 24 h, have you walked?
– During the past 24 h, how difficult has it been to walk?
– During the past 24 h, have you exercised?
– During the past 24 h, how difficult has it been to exercise?
– During the past 24 h, have you done any social activities?
– During the past 24 h, how difficult has it been to do social activities?
– During the past 24 h, have you done any leisure activities?
– During the past 24 h, how difficult has it been to do leisure activities?
– During the past 24 h, have you done any household activities?
– During the past 24 h, how difficult has it been to do household activities?
– During the past 24 h, have you done any work or school activities?
– During the past 24 h, how difficult has it been to do work or school activities?
– Do you have a spouse/partner?
– During the past 24 h, how difficult has your relationships been with your
partner?
– During the past 24 h, how difficult have your relationships been with
other important people in your life, e.g., family, friends, people at work?
– During the past 24 h, how difficult has it been to wash or dress yourself?
– During the past 24 h, how difficult has it been to fall asleep?
– During the past 24 h, how difficult has it been to stay asleep?
Rescue medication/protection
During the past 24 h, how many sanitary products (panty liners, pads
or tampons) did you use for any type of vaginal bleeding?
During the past 24 h, how many sanitary products (panty liners, pads or
tampons) did you use for any type of vaginal bleeding?
During the past 24 h, did you use your rescue medication for your
endometriosis-related pain?
During the past 24 h, did you use your rescue medication for your
endometriosis-related pain?
During the past 24 h, how many tablets of your rescue medication did
you use?
During the past 24 h, how many tablets of your rescue medication did
you use?
van Nooten et al. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes (2018) 16:3 Page 12 of 13
Competing interests
Floortje E. van Nooten was employed by Astellas at the time of work. Jen
Cline, Celeste A. Elash, Jean Paty, and Matthew Reaney were employed by
ERT at the time of this work; Jean Paty was also employed by Quintiles.
Publisher’sN o t e
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affiliations.
Author details
1Astellas Pharma, Leiden, the Netherlands. 2PinneyAssociates, 201 N. Craig
street, suite 320, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA. 3ERT, 225 W Station Square Dr,
Ste 220, Pittsburgh, PA 15219, USA. 4Quintiles IMS Incorporated, One IMS
Way, Plymouth Meeting, PA 19462, USA. 5ERT, Peterborough PE2 6FZ, UK.
Received: 13 July 2017 Accepted: 30 November 2017
References
1. Kennedy S, Bergqvist A, Chapron C, D ’Hooghe T, Dunselman G, Greb R, et
al. ESHRE guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of endometriosis. Hum
Reprod. 2005;20:2698 –704.
2. Bulletti C, Coccia ME, Battistoni S, Borini A. Endometriosis and infertility. J
Assist Reprod Genet. 2010;27:441 –7.
3. De Graaff AA, D'Hooghe TM, Dunselman GA, Dirksen CD, Hummelshoj L,
Consortium WE, et al. The significant effect of endometriosis on physical,
mental and social wellbeing: results from an international cross-sectional
survey. Hum Reprod. 2013;28:2677 –85.
4. Nnoaham KE, Hummelshoj L, Webster P, d'Hooghe T, de Cicco NF, de Cicco
NC, et al. Impact of endometriosis on quality of life and work productivity: a
multicenter study across ten countries. Fertil Steril. 2011;96:366 –73. e8
5. Biberoglu KO, Behrman SJ. Dosage aspects of danazol therapy in
endometriosis: short-term and long-term effectiveness. Am J Obstet
Gynecol. 1981;139:645–54.
6. Carr B, Dmowski WP, O'Brien C, Jiang P, Burke J, Jimenez R, et al. Elagolix, an
oral GnRH antagonist, versus subcutaneous depot medroxyprogesterone
acetate for the treatment of endometriosis: effects on bone mineral density.
Reprod Sci. 2014;21:1341 –51.
7. Patrick DL, Burke LB, Gwaltney CJ, Leidy NK, Martin ML, Molsen E, et al.
Content validity–establishing and reporting the evidence in newly
developed patient-reported outcomes (PRO) instruments for medical
product evaluation: ISPOR PRO good research practices task force report:
part 2–assessing respondent understanding. Value Health. 2011;14:978 –88.
8. Walton MK, Powers JH 3rd, Hobart J, Patrick D, Marquis P, Vamvakas S, et al.
Clinical outcome assessments: conceptual foundation-report of the ISPOR
clinical outcomes assessment - emerging good practices for outcomes
research task force. Value Health. 2015;18:741 –52.
9. US Dept of Health and Human Services. FDA guidance for industry -
patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development
to support labeling claims. 2009. https://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/
%E2%80%A6/Guidances/UCM193282.pdf. Accessed Oct 2016.
10. Jones G, Jenkinson C, Kennedy S. Evaluating the responsiveness of the
endometriosis health profile questionnaire: the EHP-30. Qual Life Res. 2004;
13:705–13.
11. Jones G, Jenkinson C, Kennedy S. Development of the short form
endometriosis health profile questionnaire: the EHP-5. Qual Life Res. 2004;
13:695–704.
12. Jones G, Jenkinson C, Taylor N, Mills A, Kennedy S. Measuring quality of life
in women with endometriosis: tests of data quality, score reliability,
response rate and scaling assumptions of the endometriosis health profile
questionnaire. Hum Reprod. 2006;21:2686 –93.
13. Jones G, Kennedy S, Barnard A, Wong J, Jenkinson C. Development of an
endometriosis quality-of-life instrument: the endometriosis health Profile-30.
Obstet Gynecol. 2001;98:258 –64.
14. Deal LS, DiBenedetti DB, Williams VS, Fehnel SE. The development and
validation of the daily electronic endometriosis pain and bleeding diary.
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2010;8:64.
15. Reflection paper on the regulatory guidance for the use of health-related
quality of life (HRQL) measures in the evaluation of medicinal products,
2005. http://www.ispor.org/workpaper/emea-hrql-guidance.pdf. Accessed
Oct 2016.
16. Tourangeau R. Cognitive science and survey methods. In: Jabine T, Straf M,
Tanur J, Tourangeau R, editors. Cognitive aspects of survey methodology:
building a bridge between disciplines. Washington, D.C.: National Academy
Press; 1984. p. 73 –100.
17. Wild D, Grove A, Martin M, Eremenco S, McElroy S, Verjee-Lorenz A, et
al. Principles of good practice for the translation and cultural
adaptation process for patient-reported outcomes (PRO) measures:
report of the ISPOR task force for translation and cultural adaptation.
Value Health. 2005;8:94 –104.
18. Muhr T. User's manual for ATLAS.Ti 5.0. Berlin: ATLASti Scientific Software
Development GmbH; 2004.
• We accept pre-submission inquiries
Our selector tool helps you to find the most relevant journal
We provide round the clock customer support
Convenient online submission
Thorough peer review
Inclusion in PubMed and all major indexing services
Maximum visibility for your research
Submit your manuscript at
www.biomedcentral.com/submit
Submit your next manuscript to BioMed Central
and we will help you at every step:
van Nooten et al. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes (2018) 16:3 Page 13 of 13
Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below.
Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure
cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can
have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy
(via DOI)
is the canonical version.