We thank Drs Parra and Feres for their Letter to the Editors regarding our original article in the American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology. They expressed concern that our population-based study examining the surgical management of endometriosis in Ontario, Canada, did not include the classification of the disease. Population-based studies using administrative health data sets have several advantages, including a large sample size, a lower risk of selection bias (given that they provide data on individuals that would normally not participate in prospective cohorts or respond to surveys), the possibility to cover temporal trends, and their cost-effectiveness. However, this study design comes with its limitations. In our study, we used data sets that do not include the staging of endometriosis. Because of this limitation, we relied on surgical intervention to predict disease stage, assuming that individuals with more advanced endometriosis would undergo more extensive surgical intervention. We agree that accurate categorization and disease staging is necessary to tailor management for each individual patient. We propose that the integration of accurate disease staging in longitudinal population-based cohorts should be prioritized to improve care for endometriosis patients. This is the intent of the World Endometriosis Research Foundation Endometriosis Phenome and Biobanking Harmonisation Project. 1 Although this collaboration is continually expanding to include more centers, it is yet to be globally adopted. Ideally, patients with deep endometriosis would receive an accurate diagnosis preoperatively through diagnostic imaging 2 and consequently be counseled about their potential surgical outcomes.We draw your attention to our publication that looks at the 30-day postoperative outcomes in this cohort. 3 Here, we examined the outcomes based on the route of hysterectomy and identified that the individuals undergoing abdominal hysterectomy had a longer hospital stay and a higher rate of postoperative visits for pain than those undergoing minimally invasive surgery, which is consistent with the literature on this topic. Given that the main objective of the article in this discussion was to examine the long-term outcomes after endometriosis surgery, including reoperation trends, we felt that the more appropriate comparison groups were based on the extent of surgical intervention rather than the surgical modality. Additional analysis (not shown) demonstrated that the reoperation rates did not differ between the patients who underwent a minimally invasive hysterectomy and those with an abdominal hysterectomy.We thank the authors for their critical review of our article and hope that this discussion is helpful in promoting the utility of administrative health data sets in expanding endometriosis research.