Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39223834›Full record

ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2024

Survey of General Practitioner Perspectives on Endometriosis Diagnosis, Referrals, Management and Guidelines in New Zealand.

Katherine Ellis, Alina Meador, Anna Ponnampalam, Rachael Wood

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 'The Difficulty of Diagnosis Compromises Patient Care for People With Endometriosis': Interview Study With Aotearoa New Zealand General Practitioners.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

4 authors.

Katherine EllisDepartment of Chemical and Process Engineering, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0003-3501-582X
Alina MeadorSchool of Population Health, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Anna PonnampalamDepartment of Physiology, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Rachael WoodDepartment of Chemical and Process Engineering, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand.

Funding

The authors received no specific funding for this work.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThere is a growing body of literature concerning endometriosis patients' perspectives on the healthcare system and endometriosis care in New Zealand. However, there is little research available on the perspectives of general practitioners (GPs) internationally, and none currently in New Zealand. The purpose of this study is to address New Zealand GPs' understanding of and approach to endometriosis diagnosis, referrals, management and guidelines. METHODS AND MATERIALS: An online, anonymous survey was shared with 869 GP clinics and completed by 185 New Zealand-based GPs regarding their awareness and application of the inaugural 2020 'Diagnosis and Management of Endometriosis in New Zealand' guidelines, their perception of their endometriosis knowledge, the diagnostic value they assign to symptoms, the treatments they recommend and the reasons they refer patients to specialist gynaecologists. Differences between groups were conducted using Chi-squared tests, and text answers were assessed thematically using inductive, semantic coding.

resultsAll 185 GPs had gynaecology consults, and 73% had gynaecology consults every week. Despite 65% being aware of the 2020 guidelines, only 35% overall had read them. Only 52% of GPs considered themselves to know enough about endometriosis for their routine practice. The most common treatment to be considered first line was intrauterine contraceptive devices (IUDs; 96%), whereas the most common alternative treatment recommended was exercise (69%). The most common reason for referral to specialist care was the failure of all attempted treatments (84%).

conclusionsMany of the study's results align with current New Zealand and international endometriosis guidelines, particularly the prioritisation of progestin-only therapies, the reduced emphasis on surgical treatment as the first line and the low rates of alternative treatment recommendations. This study also highlights the need to improve awareness of inappropriate GP recommendations, including long-term treatment with prescription-only pain relief such as codeine and pregnancy for symptomatic relief. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Two of the authors involved in the design and conduct of the study, data interpretation and manuscript preparation have sought care for endometriosis.

trial registrationNA.

Indexed as

EndometriosisGeneral PractitionersReferral and ConsultationAdultAttitude of Health PersonnelFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNew ZealandPractice Guidelines as TopicPractice Patterns, Physicians'Surveys and Questionnairesclinical careendometriosisgeneral practitionersguidelineshealthcareroutine practicesymptom recognition

Identifiers

PMID39223834
PMCPMC11369013

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.