Beyond Diagnostic Delay in Endometriosis: Consequences for Women’s Quality of Life and Opportunities for Earlier Detection
article
OA: diamond
CC0
AI-generated summary
This review identifies causes of diagnostic delay in endometriosis, such as normalized pain and limited awareness, and highlights that these delays worsen quality of life while proposing earlier detection through improved clinical assessment and imaging.
One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works
AI-generated deep summary
This literature review examines the causes and consequences of diagnostic delays in endometriosis, identifying an average delay of 6.8 years driven by symptom normalization, limited physician awareness, and historical reliance on laparoscopy. The authors note that these delays significantly increase the risk of disease progression, chronic pain, and socioeconomic burden for patients. To address these issues, the paper recommends shifting toward clinical assessment, expert imaging, improved primary care education, and the validation of emerging biomarkers. This paper is centrally about endometriosis — specifically focusing on strategies to reduce diagnostic delay and improve early detection.
Read from the paper's body, not the abstract. Not a substitute for reading the paper. No clinical advice. How this works
Abstract
Background: Endometriosis is a chronic estrogen-dependent disorder affecting approximately 10% of individuals assigned female at birth worldwide. Despite its prevalence, diagnosis is typically delayed by 4–12 years. Objectives: To identify the causes of diagnostic delay, assess its consequences, and summarize strategies for earlier diagnosis. Methods: A literature review of studies published through 2025 was conducted using PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO. Eligible studies reported diagnostic timelines in physician-confirmed endometriosis. Results: The average diagnostic delay was approximately 6.8 years. Major contributing factors included normalization of menstrual pain, limited physician awareness, symptom misattribution, and historical reliance on laparoscopy. Delayed diagnosis increases the risk of disease progression, chronic pain, reduced quality of life, and socioeconomic burden. Conclusions: Earlier diagnosis requires greater reliance on clinical assessment, expert ultrasound or MRI, improved primary care education, and validation of emerging biomarkers to facilitate timely referral and treatment.
Full text
7,820 characters
· extracted from
oa-doi-fallback
· 6 sections
· click to expand
Background
Endometriosis is a chronic estrogen-dependent disorder affecting approximately 10% of individuals assigned female at birth worldwide. Despite its prevalence, diagnosis is typically delayed by 4–12 years.
Objectives
To identify the causes of diagnostic delay, assess its consequences, and summarize strategies for earlier diagnosis.
Methods
A literature review of studies published through 2025 was conducted using PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO. Eligible studies reported diagnostic timelines in physician-confirmed endometriosis.
Results
The average diagnostic delay was approximately 6.8 years. Major contributing factors included normalization of menstrual pain, limited physician awareness, symptom misattribution, and historical reliance on laparoscopy. Delayed diagnosis increases the risk of disease progression, chronic pain, reduced quality of life, and socioeconomic burden.
Conclusions
Earlier diagnosis requires greater reliance on clinical assessment, expert ultrasound or MRI, improved primary care education, and validation of emerging biomarkers to facilitate timely referral and treatment.
References
1. Koninckx PR, Fernandes R, Ussia A, Schindler L, Wattiez A, Al-Suwaidi S, et al. Pathogenesis
Based Diagnosis and Treatment of Endometriosis. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne).
2021;12:745548. doi:10.3389/fendo.2021.745548.
2. Sims OT, Gupta J, Missmer SA, Aninye IO. Stigma and Endometriosis: A Brief Overview and
Recommendations to Improve Psychosocial Well-Being and Diagnostic Delay. Int J Environ Res
Public Health. 2021;18(15):8210. doi:10.3390/ijerph18158210.
3. Simpson CN, Lomiguen CM, Chin J. Combating Diagnostic Delay of Endometriosis in
Adolescents via Educational Awareness: A Systematic Review. Cureus. 2021;13(5):e15143.
doi:10.7759/cureus.15143.
4. Fryer J, Mason-Jones AJ, Woodward A. Understanding Diagnostic Delay for Endometriosis: A
Scoping Review Using the Social-Ecological Framework. Health Care Women Int.
2025;46(3):335–351. doi:10.1080/07399332.2024.2413056.
5. De Kok L, Schers H, Boersen Z, Braat D, Teunissen D, Nap A. Towards Reducing Diagnostic
Delay in Endometriosis in Primary Care: A Qualitative Study. BJGP Open.
2024;8(3):BJGPO.2024.0019. doi:10.3399/BJGPO.2024.0019.
6. Swift B, Taneri B, Becker CM, Basarir H, Naci H, Missmer SA, et al. Prevalence, Diagnostic
Delay and Economic Burden of Endometriosis and Its Impact on Quality of Life: Results from an
Eastern Mediterranean Population. Eur J Public Health. 2024;34(2):244–252.
doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckad216.
7. De Corte P, Klinghardt M, Von Stockum S, Heinemann K. Time to Diagnose Endometriosis:
Current Status, Challenges and Regional Characteristics—A Systematic Literature Review.
BJOG. 2025;132(2):118–130. doi:10.1111/1471-0528.17973.
8. Saunders PTK, Horne AW. Endometriosis: New Insights and Opportunities for Relief of
Symptoms. Biol Reprod. 2025;113(5):1029–1043. doi:10.1093/biolre/ioaf164.
9. De Kok L, Boersen Z, Coppus S, Van Haaps A, Van Hanegem N, Klinkert E, et al. Diagnostic
Delay in Endometriosis: Is There Any Progress? Reprod Biomed Online. 2026;53(1):105405.
doi:10.1016/j.rbmo.2025.105405.
10. De Barry L, Bahall V. Endometriosis beyond the Pelvis: Insights from Atypical
Presentations Leading to Diagnostic Delays. Case Rep Womens Health. 2026;49:e00786.
doi:10.1016/j.crwh.2026.e00786.
11. Mick I, Freger SM, Marien M, Gholiof M, Leonardi M. Diagnostic Accuracy of
Transvaginal Ultrasonography for Endometriosis According to the International Deep
Endometriosis Analysis Consensus. O&G Open. 2025;2(1):e061.
doi:10.1097/OG9.0000000000000061.
12. Herranz-Blanco B, Daoud E, Viganò P, García-Velasco JA, Colli E. Development and
Validation of an Endometriosis Diagnostic Method Based on Serum Biomarkers and Clinical
Variables. Biomolecules. 2023;13(7):1052. doi:10.3390/biom13071052.
13. Dantkale KS, Agrawal M. A Comprehensive Review of the Diagnostic Landscape of
Endometriosis: Assessing Tools, Uncovering Strengths, and Acknowledging Limitations. Cureus.
2024;16:e56978. doi:10.7759/cureus.56978.
14. Karavadra B, Thorpe G, Morris E, Semlyen J. Exploring Delay to Diagnosis of
Endometriosis, a Healthcare Professional Perspective. BMC Health Serv Res. 2025;25(1):1483.
doi:10.1186/s12913-025-13536-5.
15. Le KN, Nezhat C, Nezhat C, Benor A, DeCherney A. An Update on Endometriosis
Biomarkers. Minerva Obstet Gynecol. 2024;76(5). doi:10.23736/S2724-606X.23.05369-1.
16. Avery JC, Deslandes A, Freger SM, Leonardi M, Lo G, Carneiro G, et al. Noninvasive
Diagnostic Imaging for Endometriosis Part 1: A Systematic Review of Recent Developments in
Ultrasound, Combination Imaging, and Artificial Intelligence. Fertil Steril. 2024;121(2):164–
188. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2023.12.008.
17. Vercellini P, Buffo C, Viganò P, Somigliana E. Update on Medical Treatment of
Endometriosis: New Drugs or New Therapeutic Approaches? Gynecol Obstet Invest.
2024;90(6):535–559. doi:10.1159/000542947.
18. Pascoal E, Wessels JM, Aas-Eng MK, Abrao MS, Condous G, Jurkovic D, et al. Strengths
and Limitations of Diagnostic Tools for Endometriosis and Relevance in Diagnostic Test
Accuracy Research. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2022;60(3):309–327. doi:10.1002/uog.24892.
19. Ortega-Gutiérrez M, Muñoz-Gamez A, Girón-Prieto MLS. Primary Care Approach to
Endometriosis: Diagnostic Challenges and Management Strategies—A Narrative Review. J Clin
Med. 2025;14(13):4757. doi:10.3390/jcm14134757.
20. Young SW, Jha P, Chamié L, Rodgers S, Kho RM, Horrow MM, et al. Society of
Radiologists in Ultrasound Consensus on Routine Pelvic US for Endometriosis. Radiology.
2024;311(1):e232191. doi:10.1148/radiol.232191.
21. Moustafa S, Burn M, Mamillapalli R, Nematian S, Flores V, Taylor HS. Accurate Diagnosis
of Endometriosis Using Serum microRNAs. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2020;223(4):557.e1–557.e11.
doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2020.02.050.
22. Saunders PTK, Horne AW. Endometriosis: Etiology, Pathobiology, and Therapeutic
Prospects. Cell. 2021;184(11):2807–2824. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2021.04.041.
23. Brubel R, Balogh DB, Polgar B, Szereday L, Hudelist G, Acs N, Bokor A. Serum Galectin-
1 as a Diagnostic Biomarker in Endometriosis: A Prospective Longitudinal Study. Int J Mol Sci.
2025;26(21):10390. doi:10.3390/ijms262110390.
24. Starodubtseva N, Chagovets V, Tokareva A, Dumanovskaya M, Kukaev E, Novoselova A,
et al. Diagnostic Value of Menstrual Blood Lipidomics in Endometriosis: A Pilot Study.
Biomolecules. 2024;14(8):899. doi:10.3390/biom14080899.
25. Yu X, Shi L, Deng X, Zhang Y, Wang H. Global Burden of Endometriosis from 1990 to
2021 and Projections to 2050: A Comprehensive Analysis Based on the Global Burden of
Disease Study 2021. Front Glob Womens Health. 2025;6:1613468.
doi:10.3389/fgwh.2025.1613468.
26. Wang P-H, Yang S-T, Chang W-H, Liu C-H, Lee F-K, Lee W-L. Endometriosis: Part I.
Basic Concept. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2022;61(6):927–934. doi:10.1016/j.tjog.2022.08.002.
27. Amro B, Ramirez Aristondo ME, Alsuwaidi S, Almaamari B, Hakim Z, Tahlak M, et al.
New Understanding of Diagnosis, Treatment and Prevention of Endometriosis. Int J Environ Res
Public Health. 2022;19(11):6725. doi:10.3390/ijerph19116725.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Weronika Wrzosek, Mateusz Zugaj, Jakub Skrzypek, Natalia Fidut, Karol Szyprowski, Kamila Zioło, Weronika Zarzycka, Maciej Kisielewski, Martyna Grzywacz, Bartosz Okliński
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Stats
Number of views and downloads: 65
Number of citations: 0
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.
My notes (saved in your browser only)
Ask this paper
Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works
Citation neighborhood (no data yet)
We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2026) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.
Source provenance
- openalex
- last seen: 2026-09-09T06:06:51.992953+00:00
License: CC0
· commercial use OK