CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 158Sexual function and dysfunction studiesPelvic floor disorders treatmentsGenital Health and Disease

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 220 of the 220 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Vulvodynia

Bergeron, Sophie, Reed, Barbara D., Wesselmann, Ursula, Bohm-Starke, Nina·2020·Nature Reviews Disease Primers
DOI 10.1038/s41572-020-0164-2
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Vulvodynia is a condition that occurs in 8-10% of women of all ages and is characterized by pain at the vulva that is present during sexual and/or non-sexual situations. Diagnosis is established through careful medical history and pelvic examination, including the cotton-swab test. The onset and maintenance of vulvodynia involves a complex interplay of peripheral and central pain mechanisms, pelvic floor muscle and autonomic dysfunction, anxiety, depression and childhood maltreatment as well as cognitive-affective, behavioural and interpersonal factors. Given the absence of empirically supported treatment guidelines, a stepwise approach of pelvic floor physical therapy and cognitive behavioural therapy as well as medical management is suggested, with surgery as the last option. Vulvodynia has a negative effect on the quality of life of women and their partners, and imposes a profound personal and societal economic burden. In addition, women with vulvodynia are more likely to report other chronic pain conditions, which further alters their quality of life. Future efforts should aim to increase girls', women's and healthcare professionals' education and awareness of vulvodynia, phenotype different subgroups of women based on biopsychosocial characteristics among more diverse samples, conduct longitudinal studies and improve clinical trial designs.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41572-020-0164-2

Cites

220 of 220 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 220 references

Research works printed but not linked: 11

  1. Harlow, B. L. & Stewart, E. G. A population-based assessment of chronic unexplained vulvar pain: have we underestimated the prevalence of vulvodynia? J. Am. Med. Womens Assoc. 58, 82–88 (2003).
  2. Hayes, R. D. in Female Sexual Pain Disorders (eds. Goldstein, A. T., Pukall, C. F. & Goldstein, I.) 4–8 (Wiley-Blackwell, 2009).
  3. Singhal, A., Tien, Y. Y. & Hsia, R. Y. Racial-ethnic disparities in opioid prescriptions at emergency department visits for conditions commonly associated with prescription drug abuse. PLoS One 11, e01592241 (2016).
  4. Liao, Z. & Smith, P. G. Persistent genital hyperinnervation following progesterone administration to adolescent female rats. Biol. Reprod. 91, 141–149 (2014).
  5. Wesselmann, U., Garrett-Mayer, E., Kaplan Gilpin, A. M., Zhang, L. & Czakanski, P. P. The influence of the ovarian cycle on mechanical hyperalgesia in vulvar vestibulitis–a neuropathic urogenital pain syndrome. Ann. Neurol. 60 (Suppl. 3), S29 (2006).
  6. Briere, J. & Scott, C. Principles of Trauma Therapy: A Guide to Symptoms, Evaluation, and Treatment (DSM-5 Update) (SAGE Publishing, 2014).
  7. Gauvin, S., Smith, K. B., Chamberlain, S. & Pukall, C. Communication patterns in women with provoked vestibulodynia and their partners. Psychol. Sex. 10, 369–382 (2019).
  8. Giamberardino, M. A., Wesselmann, U., Costantini, R. & Czakanski, P. in Pain Models: Translational Relevance and Applications (eds Handwerker, H. O. & Arendt-Nielsen, L.) 183–200 (IASP Press, 2013).
  9. Wesselmann, U., Sanders, C. & Czakanski, P. P. Altered CNS processing of nociceptive messages from the vagina in rats, that have recovered from uterine inflammation. Prog. Pain Res. Manag. 16, 581–588 (2000).
  10. Singhmar, P. et al. PI16 is a non-neuronal regulator of neuropathic pain. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/696542 (2019). · DOI
  11. Burnett, A. L. & Wesselmann, U. Neurobiology of the pelvis and perineum principles for a practical approach. J. Pelvic Surg. 5, 224–232 (1999).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Bergeron, S., Reed, B. D., Wesselmann, U., & Bohm-Starke, N.
Affiliations
  • Université de Montréal (CA)
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • University of Alabama at Birmingham (US)
Corresponding author
Bergeron, Sophie
ORCID
Venue
Nature Reviews Disease Primers
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2020-04-30
Volume
6
Issue
1
Pages
36-36
ISSN
2056-676X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1038/s41572-020-0164-2
OpenAlex
W4211104100
Cited by
158
References
220
Citations by year
2026: 32 · 2025: 32 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 31 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 4
FWCI
2.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • Nature Reviews Disease Primers (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Sexual function and dysfunction studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Urology › Pelvic floor disorders treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Genital Health and Disease
Keywords
vulvodynia, vulvar pain, chronic pain, pelvic floor dysfunction, autonomic dysfunction, anxiety and depression, child abuse, cognitive behavioral therapy, pelvic floor physiotherapy, medical management, quality of life, economic burden, chronic pain comorbidity, biopsychosocial model
MeSH terms
Humans, Pain, Sexual Behavior, Vulvodynia

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review