Pain catastrophising is associated with greater disease impact in women with endometriosis: a cross-sectional study

preprint OA: gold CC0

Abstract

Objective: Analyse the relationship between the dimensions of pain catastrophising, chronic pain magnitude and quality of life. Design : Cross-sectional observational study. Setting: Online survey through associations of patients with endometriosis in Spain. Sample : 111 women diagnosed with endometriosis. Methods: Primary analyses used Spearman’s ρ with 95% CIs and Benjamini-Hochberg FDR; group comparisons by PCS≥30; multivariable linear and logistic models; ROC analysis. Main outcome measures : Pain Catastrophising, pain magnitude and quality of life. Results : Higher catastrophising correlated with worse QoL (Core-EHP-30 vs PCS total ρ = 0.695, 95% CI 0.581 to 0.783) and greater pain burden (GCPS magnitude vs PCS total r = 0.594, 95% CI 0.454 to 0.705). EQ VAS correlated negatively with PCS total (ρ = -0.383, 95% CI -0.536 to -0.205). In multivariable models, Core-EHP-30 and GCPS magnitude were independently associated with PCS total and helplessness (adjusted R 2 = 0.48 and R 2 = 0.51 respectively) while the subscales of rumination (adjusted R 2 = 0.29) and magnification (adjusted R 2 = 0.35) showed an association only with Core-EHP-30. Logistic regression identified CORE-EHP-30 (OR 1.056, 95% CI 1.017 to 1.097) and GCPS magnitude (OR 1.053, 95% CI 1.006 to 1.103) as predictor of PCS≥30; AUC = 0.854 (CI 0.783 to 0.925). Conclusion : In endometriosis, pain catastrophising, (especially helplessness) shows robust associations with pain magnitude and poorer quality of life. These findings support routine pain catastrophising screening (PCS≥30) and targeted non-invasive interventions (for example, pain neuroscience education and graded therapeutic exercise, with reassessment. Longitudinal and interventional studies are warranted.
Full text 2,743 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · 2 sections · click to expand

Abstract

Objective: Analyse the relationship between the dimensions of pain catastrophising, chronic pain magnitude and quality of life. Design : Cross-sectional observational study. Setting: Online survey through associations of patients with endometriosis in Spain. Sample : 111 women diagnosed with endometriosis. Methods: Primary analyses used Spearman’s ρ with 95% CIs and Benjamini-Hochberg FDR; group comparisons by PCS≥30; multivariable linear and logistic models; ROC analysis. Main outcome measures : Pain Catastrophising, pain magnitude and quality of life. Results : Higher catastrophising correlated with worse QoL (Core-EHP-30 vs PCS total ρ = 0.695, 95% CI 0.581 to 0.783) and greater pain burden (GCPS magnitude vs PCS total r = 0.594, 95% CI 0.454 to 0.705). EQ VAS correlated negatively with PCS total (ρ = -0.383, 95% CI -0.536 to -0.205). In multivariable models, Core-EHP-30 and GCPS magnitude were independently associated with PCS total and helplessness (adjusted R 2 = 0.48 and R 2 = 0.51 respectively) while the subscales of rumination (adjusted R 2 = 0.29) and magnification (adjusted R 2 = 0.35) showed an association only with Core-EHP-30. Logistic regression identified CORE-EHP-30 (OR 1.056, 95% CI 1.017 to 1.097) and GCPS magnitude (OR 1.053, 95% CI 1.006 to 1.103) as predictor of PCS≥30; AUC = 0.854 (CI 0.783 to 0.925). Conclusion : In endometriosis, pain catastrophising, (especially helplessness) shows robust associations with pain magnitude and poorer quality of life. These findings support routine pain catastrophising screening (PCS≥30) and targeted non-invasive interventions (for example, pain neuroscience education and graded therapeutic exercise, with reassessment. Longitudinal and interventional studies are warranted. Information & Authors Information Version history Copyright This work is licensed under a Non Exclusive No Reuse License.

Keywords

Authors Metrics & Citations Metrics Article Usage 206views 82downloads Citations Download citation I. Pain catastrophising is associated with greater disease impact in women with endometriosis: a cross-sectional study. Authorea. 22 October 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22541/au.176113646.67211945/v1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.22541/au.176113646.67211945/v1 If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download. For more information or tips please see 'Downloading to a citation manager' in the Help menu.

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 AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback

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

Outcome instruments

EHP-30 VAS-pain

Condition tags

endometriosis

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2025) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-09-05T06:28:35.037241+00:00
openalex
last seen: 2026-06-10T17:14:06.276822+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK