Correction: Clinical characteristics of endometriosis with and without dysmenorrhea diagnosed by laparoscopy

There were several mistakes in Table 1 as published. Table 1 | Variable | Total/category | Dysmenorrhea (n = 345) | Non- dysmenorrhea (n = 144) | P-value | |---|---|---|---|---| | Age (years) | 489 | 29.95 ± 5.39 | 31.58 ± 6.09 | 0.006 | | BMI | 489 | 20.3 ± 3.03 | 20.3 ± 2.58 | 0.99 | | AMH (ng/mL) | 2.96 ± 2.12 | 3.13 ± 2.59 | 0.598 | | | CA125 (U/mL) | 128.6 ± 102.4 | 45.2 ± 38.7 | 0.001 | | | CA199 (U/mL) | 84.94 ± 144.91 | 75.47 ± 325.51 | 0.679 | | | Sexual activity | |||| | No | 20.0% | 16.1% | 0.314 | | | Yes | 80.0% | 83.9% | || | Adenomyosis | |||| | No | 87.2% | 93.1% | 0.081 | | | Yes | 12.8% | 6.9% | || | Infertility | |||| | No | 91.6% | 98.4% | 0.007 | | | Yes | 8.4% | 1.6% | || | Laterality of ovarian cysts | |||| | Unilateral | 77% | 79.6% | 0.56 | | | bilateral | 23% | 20.4% | || | Deep infiltrative nodules | |||| | No | 40.5% | 50.7% | 0.047 | | | Yes | 59.5% | 49.3% | || | Douglas pouch status | |||| | Normal | 34.8% | 42.3% | 0.111 | | | Partial obliteration | 16.7% | 19.7% | || | Complete obliteration | 48.5% | 38.0% | || | rASRM score | 78.5 ± 25.1 | 42.3 ± 18.9 | 0.001 | | | rASRM stage | Stage I | 0.3% | 1.4% | 0.032 | | Stage II | 1.7% | 3.5% | || | Stage III | 45.2% | 50.7% | || | StageIV | 52.8% | 44.4% | A comparison of the clinical characteristics between groups with and without dysmenorrhea. In the original Table 1, the data for “Deep infiltrative nodules” were incorrectly reported. Specifically, in the Non-dysmenorrhea group, the proportion for “No” was listed as 80.0% and for “Yes” as 20.0%. The correct values should be 50.7% for “No” and 49.3% for “Yes.” Additionally, the P-value was originally shown as 0.04, but the correct P-value is 0.047. Furthermore, in the row for “rASRM stage,” the original table showed “Stage I” in the Total/Category column, but it should simply read “Stage” as the category header. Also, the percentage for Stage II in the Non-dysmenorrhea group was originally 2.8%, which should be corrected to 3.5%. For Stage IV in the Dysmenorrhea group, the original value was 58.2%, which should be corrected to 52.8%. The corrected Table 1 appears below. There was a mistake in Table 3 as published. In the original Table 3, under the “dysmenorrhea Group (Proportion)” row, the percentage for “Ureteral Surface” was listed as 2.0%. The correct value should be 2.1%. The corrected Table 3 appears below. Table 3 | Lesion location | Ovary | Pelvic wall, intestinal surface | Ureteral surface | P-value | |---|---|---|---|---| | Non-dysmenorrhea group (Proportion) | 50.0% | 45.8% | 4.2% | 0.076 | | Dysmenorrhea group (Proportion) | 42.0% | 55.9% | 2.1% | Dysmenorrhea status according to lesion location. The original version of this article has been updated. Statements Publisher’s note All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher. Summary Keywords laparoscopy, dysmenorrhea, endometriosis, rASRM, CA125 Citation Li Y-F, Li W-W, Yang X-H, Yang Y-B and Ye Q-J (2026) Correction: Clinical characteristics of endometriosis with and without dysmenorrhea diagnosed by laparoscopy. Front. Med. 13:1887446. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2026.1887446 Received 21 May 2026 Revised 02 June 2026 Accepted 08 June 2026 Published 23 June 2026 Volume 13 - 2026 Edited and reviewed by Edgar Ricardo Vázquez-Martínez, National Autonomous University of Mexico, Mexico Updates Copyright © 2026 Li, Li, Yang, Yang and Ye. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. *Correspondence: Qing-Jian Ye, [email protected]; Yue-Bo Yang, [email protected] † These authors have contributed equally to this work Disclaimer All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.