ArticleBMC women's health2024
Examining the risk factors of chronic pelvic pain and its effect on the quality of life in refugee and non-refugee women.
Article in BMC women's health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Psychosocial etiology and management of chronic pelvic pain in women: a systematic review.BMC psychology · 2026Pooled it
- Barriers to optimal chronic pain management in refugees: a scoping review.BMC public health · 2026Article
- The power of words: the role of clinician communication and language in the management of women with chronic pelvic pain through a narrative review.Gynecology and pelvic medicine · 2026Review
- Enhancing surgical care for torture survivors: healing trauma, promoting recovery, and advancing best practices.BMC surgery · 2025Review
- Dismissed and unheard: Arab immigrant women's experiences seeking pelvic pain care in Norway.Women's health (London, England)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to determine the prevalence of chronic pelvic pain(CPP) in refugee and non-refugee women, determine the factors associated with CPP, and evaluate the effect of CPP on life quality.
methodsThis was a cross-sectional study conducted among 283 non-refugee and 278 refugee women in Turkey. A questionnaire including questions assessing chronic pelvic pain and related factors, World Health Organization Quality of Life Scale Short Form(WHOQOL-BREF), Depression Anxiety Stress Scale-21, were administered to the participants. Chi-square test, Mann-Whitney U test and multiple logistic regression analysis were used for statistical analysis.
resultsThe prevalence of chronic pelvic pain was 41.0% in refugee women and 19.1% in non-refugee women (p< 0.001). The prevalence of CPP was 1.68 times higher in refugee women than in non-refugee women (OR;95%CI:1.68;1.01-2.81). In the multivariate analysis performed in the study group, refugee status, low family income status(OR;95%CI:2.09;1.26-3.46), low back pain(OR;95%CI:2.02;1.21-3.35), dyspareunia (OR; 95%CI:2.96;1.75-4.99), number of three or more miscarriages (OR;95%CI:3.07;1.18-8.01), history of gynaecological surgery (OR;95%CI:2.44;1.33-4.50), diarrhea (OR;95%CI:2.01;1.07-3.76), urinary tract infections(OR; 95%CI:1.66;1.02-2.71) and anxiety(OR; 95%CI:1.17;1.10-1.24) were found to be risk factors for CPP. In the refugee and non-refugee groups, those with CPP had lower scores in all subdomains of the WHOQOL-BREF scale than those without CPP (p < 0.05).
conclusionsRefugee status independently contributes to the risk of developing CPP. Targeted interventions to address CPP and its associated risk factors are needed, particularly in vulnerable refugee populations, to improve their quality of life.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.