Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40511774›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of pain (London, England)2025

A Scoping Review of Interdisciplinary Care Programs for Women With Persistent Pelvic Pain.

Catherine Andrews, Marie-Louise Bird, Kim Jose, Leesa Van Niekerk

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of pain (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. 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.

Catherine AndrewsSchool of Psychological Sciences, College of Health and Medicine, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-2161-1169
Marie-Louise BirdSchool of Health Sciences, College of Health and Medicine, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9642-7196
Kim JoseMenzies Institute for Medical Research, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9346-6429
Leesa Van NiekerkSchool of Psychological Sciences, College of Health and Medicine, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6641-5888

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectivePersistent pelvic pain affects one in four women, with international guidelines recommending interdisciplinary care. However, much of the literature describing treatments for pelvic pain focus on the perspective of individual professions. This narrative scoping review aimed to increase understanding of interdisciplinary pelvic pain care in terms of the professions and treatment components included, coordination of care and the inclusion of people with lived experience (PWLE) in program development. DATABASES AND DATA TREATMENT: Guided by PRISMA guidelines for scoping reviews, systematic database searches were conducted in CINAHL, Scopus, Medline and PsychINFO to identify interdisciplinary programs for women with persistent pelvic pain, including pelvic pain diagnoses such as endometriosis, vulvodynia and painful bladder syndrome. Data were charted on number and type of professions (disciplines) included, treatment components, care organisation and coordination, and PWLE involvement.

resultsThe search yielded 1068 records; 69 full-text articles were reviewed, and 16 studies were eligible for inclusion. Commonly included professions were physiotherapy, psychology and gynaecology. Treatment components included assessment, education and pain management strategies. Information pertaining to the coordination of care between professions and the engagement of PWLE in program development was limited.

conclusionThis review found significant variation in the structure and components of interdisciplinary pelvic pain care programs, emphasising the need for greater consistency in their development and implementation. Further empirical research is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of specific program components. Enhanced coordination among professions and increased involvement of PWLE in program design are also recommended. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: This scoping review found wide variability in the processes of interdisciplinary pelvic pain care for women. Professions most frequently included were pelvic physiotherapy, psychology and gynaecology, and components most consistently included were assessment, education and pain management strategies. Coordination of care was poorly described, and people with lived experience (PWLE) were rarely involved in program development. Findings highlight the need for greater inclusion of PWLE in program design, and greater standardisation of interdisciplinary care so that outcomes can be evaluated.

Indexed as

Pain ManagementPatient Care TeamPelvic PainFemaleHumans

Identifiers

PMID40511774
PMCPMC12164245

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.