Cited by 347Fibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome ResearchPsychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 50 of the 51 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 1 are not checked yet.

Fibromyalgia diagnosis and biased assessment: Sex, prevalence and bias

Open access

Abstract

PURPOSE: Multiple clinical and epidemiological studies have provided estimates of fibromyalgia prevalence and sex ratio, but different criteria sets and methodology, as well as bias, have led to widely varying (0.4%->11%) estimates of prevalence and female predominance (>90% to <61%). In general, studies have failed to distinguish Criteria based fibromyalgia (CritFM) from Clinical fibromyalgia (ClinFM). In the current study we compare CritFM with ClinFM to investigate gender and other biases in the diagnosis of fibromyalgia. METHODS: We used a rheumatic disease databank and 2016 fibromyalgia criteria to study prevalence and sex ratios in a selection biased sample of 1761 referred and diagnosed fibromyalgia patients and in an unbiased sample of 4342 patients with no diagnosis with respect to fibromyalgia. We compared diagnostic and clinical variables according to gender, and we reanalyzed a German population study (GPS) (n = 2435) using revised 2016 criteria for fibromyalgia. RESULTS: In the selection-biased sample of referred patients with fibromyalgia, more than 90% were women. However, when an unselected sample of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients was studied for the presence of fibromyalgia, women represented 58.7% of fibromyalgia cases. Women had slightly more symptoms than men, including generalized pain (36.8% vs. 32.4%), count of 37 symptoms (4.7 vs. 3.7) and mean polysymptomatic distress scores (10.2 vs. 8.2). We also found a linear relation between the probability of being females and fibromyalgia and fibromyalgia severity. Women in the GPS represented 59.2% of cases. DISCUSSION: The perception of fibromyalgia as almost exclusively (≥90%) a women's disorder is not supported by data in unbiased studies. Using validated self-report criteria and unbiased selection, the female proportion of fibromyalgia cases was ≤60% in the unbiased studies, and the observed CritFM prevalence of fibromyalgia in the GPS was ~2%. ClinFM is the public face of fibromyalgia, but is severely affected by selection and confirmation bias in the clinic and publications, underestimating men with fibromyalgia and overestimating women. We recommend the use of 2016 fibromyalgia criteria for clinical diagnosis and epidemiology because of its updated scoring and generalized pain requirement. Fibromyalgia and generalized pain positivity, widespread pain (WPI), symptom severity scale (SSS) and polysymptomatic distress (PSD) scale should always be reported.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pone.0203755

Cites

50 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. W Häuser, 2017, Epidemiology, FIBROMYALGIA: Pain

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 347

Metadata

Authors
Wolfe, F., Walitt, B., Perrot, S., Rasker, J. J., & Häuser, W.
Affiliations
  • University of Kansas (US)
  • Georgetown University (US)
  • Hôpital Cochin (FR)
  • University of Twente (NL)
  • Klinikum Saarbrücken (DE)
Corresponding author
Wolfe, Frederick
Venue
PLOS ONE
Published
2018-09-13
Volume
13
Issue
9
Pages
e0203755
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2890457018
Cited by
346
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 45 · 2025: 43 · 2024: 51 · 2023: 58 · 2022: 47 · 2021: 45 · 2020: 39 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 1
FWCI
20.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, public-domain)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, public-domain)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, public-domain)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • mediaTUM – the media and publications repository of the Technical University Munich (Technical University Munich) (submittedVersion)
  • University of Twente Research Information (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Fibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Keywords
fibromyalgia, sex bias, prevalence, sex ratio, diagnostic criteria, selection bias, confirmation bias, gender differences, rheumatoid arthritis, pain symptoms
MeSH terms
Aged, Arthritis, Rheumatoid, Female, Fibromyalgia, Germany, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Middle Aged, Pain, Severity of Illness Index, Sex Factors, Prevalence, Databases, Factual, Self Report, Sexism

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