↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Vulvodynia is not created equally: empirical classification of women with vulvodynia

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Pain Research, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
twitter
12 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 Mendeley
Title
Vulvodynia is not created equally: empirical classification of women with vulvodynia
Published in
Journal of Pain Research, July 2017
DOI 10.2147/jpr.s136751
Pubmed ID
Authors

Meryl Alappattu, Georgine Lamvu, Jessica Feranec, Kathryn Witzeman, Michael Robinson, Andrea Rapkin

Abstract

Vulvodynia classification is based on the sensory dimensions of pain and does not include psychological factors associated with the pain experience and treatment outcomes. Previous work has shown that individuals with chronic pain can be classified into subgroups based on pain sensitivity, psychological distress, mood, and symptom severity. The aim of this study was to identify distinct subgroups of women with vulvodynia enrolled in the National Vulvodynia Registry. We hypothesized that women with vulvodynia can be clustered into subgroups based on distress and pain sensitivity. A cross-sectional study. We conducted an exploratory hierarchical agglomerative cluster analysis using Ward's cluster method and squared Euclidean distances to identify unique subgroups based on baseline psychological distress and pain sensitivity. The variables included the catastrophizing subscale of the Coping Strategies Questionnaire, the Beck Depression Inventory, the State Trait Anxiety Index-Trait scale, McGill Pain Questionnaire-Affective subscale, and vulvar and pelvic muscle pressure pain sensitivity. Eight sites enrolled women who presented with vaginal or vulval pain of at least 3-month duration. Two distinct subgroups, high pain sensitivity with high distress (n=27) and low pain sensitivity with low distress (n=100), emerged from the cluster analysis. Validation indicated that subgroups differed in terms of clinical pain intensity, sensory aspects of pain, and intercourse pain. Empirical classification indicates that unique subgroups exist in women with vulvodynia. Providers should be aware of the heterogeneity of this condition with respect to pain-related distress and pain sensitivity.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 59 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 10%
Student > Bachelor 6 10%
Researcher 4 7%
Other 4 7%
Other 11 19%
Unknown 21 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 17%
Psychology 8 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 10%
Neuroscience 3 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 3%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 24 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 30. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 October 2017.
All research outputs
#1,326,472
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pain Research
#152
of 1,969 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,921
of 327,299 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pain Research
#7
of 59 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,969 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 327,299 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 59 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.