Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29359605›Full record

ArticleThe European journal of general practice2018

Facilitators and barriers in the diagnostic process of vulvovaginal complaints (vulvodynia) in general practice: a qualitative study.

Peter Leusink, Doreth Teunissen, Peter L Lucassen, Ellen T Laan, Antoine L Lagro-Janssen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The European journal of general practice, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 'It's not just thrush, it's recurrent thrush': a qualitative study of patient and clinician perspectives on diagnosing recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Peter Leusinka Department of Primary and Community Care, Unit Gender & Women's Health , Radboud University Medical Centre , Nijmegen , the Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0696-4228
Doreth Teunissena Department of Primary and Community Care, Unit Gender & Women's Health , Radboud University Medical Centre , Nijmegen , the Netherlands.
Peter L Lucassena Department of Primary and Community Care, Unit Gender & Women's Health , Radboud University Medical Centre , Nijmegen , the Netherlands.
Ellen T Laanb Department of Sexology and Psychosomatic Obstetrics and Gynaecology , Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam , Amsterdam , the Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6084-9207
Antoine L Lagro-Janssenb Department of Sexology and Psychosomatic Obstetrics and Gynaecology , Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam , Amsterdam , the Netherlands.
Radboud University Nijmegen · NLAmsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe gap between the relatively high prevalence of provoked vulvodynia (PVD) in the general population and the low incidence in primary care can partly be explained by physicians' lack of knowledge about the assessment and management of PVD.

objectivesTo recognize barriers and facilitators of GPs in the diagnostic process of women presenting with recurrent vulvovaginal complaints.

methodsA qualitative focus group study in 17 Dutch GPs, five men and 12 women. An interview guide, based on the scientific literature and the expertise of the researchers, including a vignette of a patient, was used to direct the discussion between the GPs. The interviews were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim. A systematic text analysis of the transcripts was performed after data saturation was reached.

resultsAnalysis of the interviews generated three major themes: Identifying and discussing sexual complaints, importance of gender in professional experience, and coping with professional uncertainty. Within these themes, the reluctance regarding sexual complaints, male gender, negative emotional responses when faced with professional uncertainty, as well as lack of education were barriers to the diagnostic process and management of PVD. Female gender and understanding that patients can profit from enquiring about sexual health issues were found to be facilitating factors.

conclusionsTo improve the care for women with PVD, attitude and skills of GPs regarding taking a sexual history and performing a vulvovaginal examination should be addressed, as well as GPs' coping strategies regarding their professional uncertainty.

Indexed as

Clinical Decision-MakingGeneral PracticePrimary Health CareAdultAttitude of Health PersonnelDiagnosis, DifferentialFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchUncertaintyVulvodyniaclinical decision-makingdifferential diagnosisgeneral practice(MeSH)uncertaintyvulvodynia

Identifiers

PMID29359605
PMCPMC5795631
OpenAlexW2791528836

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.