I read with interest the article by Shah et al. about measurement of patient knowledge level of the pathogenesis, diagnosis, and available treatment options for pelvic floor disorders, using a validated Prolapse and Incontinence Knowledge Questionnaire, in a multi-ethnic cohort of women attending the gynecology clinic and its impact on health care-seeking behavior [1]. The results showed that greater patient awareness and education and in turn more frequent reporting of symptoms, diagnostic evaluation, and receipt of care could partly explain the higher incidence and/or prevalence of pelvic floor disorders observed in white women in most previous reports. The knowledge barrier found in non-white women of their study was similarly responsible for low care seeking in urinary incontinent women from the Middle East [2]. Likewise, incontinence status minimally affected individual knowledge level since pelvic floor disorders were perceived by Middle Eastern women, both continent and incontinent equally, as a neurological or senile disorder rather than an obstetric/gynecologic condition related to childbirth or menopause [3].The influence of this ethnic variation in women's background knowledge of pelvic floor disorders and subsequent care seeking is, however, frequently overlooked in incidence and/or prevalence studies of multi-ethnic and/ or multi-national patient populations. This highlights the inherent "selection" bias in estimates based on hospital data [4]. Furthermore, care seeking for female pelvic floor disorders is not only dependent on patient "internal" knowledge level but also on other "external" ethnicitybased factors [5]. These include convenience of consultation, provider gender preference, access to health care facilities, expectations from health care, language proficiency, incurred service cost, and perceptions of medical encounter [3,5]. Heit et al. recently described a 14-item modified Melnyck's barrier scale as an objective and psychometrically validated measurement tool of external barriers to care seeking in an ethnically heterogeneous group of incontinent women [5].As Shah et al. noted, the ethnology of pelvic floor disorders is poorly studied in the urogynecologic literature partly because determination of ethnicity is ambiguous, is not dichotomous, has no scientific definition, is not synonymous with race or nationality, and might be a cultural identification rather than a genetic indicator of some biological difference. However, the ethnic disparity in the incidence and/or prevalence of pelvic floor disorders cannot be entirely explained by variation in care-seeking behavior related to women's knowledge, attitude, or socioeconomic status [1,4,5]. The ethnic effect is likely multifactorial caused by differences in reproductive, demographic, cultural, and biologic variables such as parity, body mass index, lifestyle, diet, smoking, athletic exercise, position at delivery, micturition or defecation, life expectancy, collagen metabolism, and functional topography of the female pelvic floor and b...