Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38405184›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of women's health2024

"SO FAR AWAY" How Doctors Can Contribute to Making Endometriosis Hell on Earth. A Call for Humanistic Medicine and Empathetic Practice for Genuine Person-Centered Care. A Narrative Review.

Giulia Emily Cetera, Federica Facchin, Paola Viganò, Camilla Erminia Maria Merli, Annalisa Frassineti, Jessica Fiorini, Edgardo Somigliana, Paolo Vercellini

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of women's health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
7.0field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Giulia Emily CeteraGynecology Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-8434-6284
Federica FacchinDepartment of Psychology, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-8944-1440
Paola ViganòAcademic Center for Research on Adenomyosis and Endometriosis, Department of Clinical Sciences and Community Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-3674-5912
Camilla Erminia Maria MerliGynecology Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0009-0001-5294-1123
Annalisa FrassinetiAssociazione Progetto Endometriosi Organizzazione di Volontariato, Reggio Emilia, Italy.
Jessica FioriniAssociazione Progetto Endometriosi Organizzazione di Volontariato, Reggio Emilia, Italy.
Edgardo SomiglianaAcademic Center for Research on Adenomyosis and Endometriosis, Department of Clinical Sciences and Community Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-0223-0032
Paolo VercelliniGynecology Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-4195-0996
University of Milan · ITFondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico · ITUniversità Cattolica del Sacro Cuore · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

"SO FAR AWAY" * How Doctors Can Contribute to Making Endometriosis Hell on Earth [* by Knopfler M. In Dire Straits. Brothers in Arms. Vertigo Records, U.K., 1985]. Abstract: The distance physicians may create within the relationship with their patients by not having a humanistic approach to their practice may strongly influence clinical outcomes. The purpose of this paper is to convey the well-known narrative of patient dissatisfaction into pro-action by discussing the aspects of dehumanization, which may occur in the relationship between physicians and women with endometriosis. Eight dimensions of dehumanization are examined and related to everyday scenarios occurring in endometriosis care settings and the possible downstream consequences on patients' clinical outcomes are described. Objectification, which may come across as minimization of pain, may not only increase patients' perception of pain but also lead to undertreatment of unrecognized forms of endometriosis, especially among adolescents. Passivity, that is not favoring shared decision-making nor self-management, may compromise adherence to treatment, reducing patients' trust in physicians and quality of life. The same consequences may result from homogenization, that is giving for granted that all patients have the same access to care. Both isolation, ie not practicing therapeutic empathy, and loss of meaning, ie not supporting patients in the re-definition of their life plans, may affect women's psychological wellbeing and further increase pain perception. Ignoring women's personal journey by not providing clear information on the consequences endometriosis may have on their lives may favor women's self-silencing. Not promoting an un-biased communication and not setting aside scientific polarization are the main features of dislocation, which may jeopardize patient empowerment. Lastly, having a reductionist approach to the body may contribute to chronicization of pain, thus compromising quality of life. This considered, taking time to listen to women with endometriosis and tailoring decisions on the basis of their individual needs should be fostered as a moral duty. Physicians should always keep in mind that they are not only deliverers of treatment; they are a form of treatment themselves.

Indexed as

dehumanizationendometriosispatient-centered carephsycians’ roletreatment

Identifiers

PMID38405184
PMCPMC10894706
OpenAlexW4391943875

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.