Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17054168›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2006

Progesterone for Premenstrual Syndrome.

O Ford, A Lethaby, B Mol, H Roberts

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Progesterone for premenstrual syndrome.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012
    Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Key to Life: Physiological Role and Clinical Implications of Progesterone.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021
    Review
  11. Observational
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Premenstrual dysphoric disorder: burden of illness and treatment update.Journal of psychiatry & neuroscience : JPN · 2008
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

O FordSunnybank, Over stratton, South Petherton, Somerset, UK. olive.ford@care4free.net
A Lethaby
B Mol
H Roberts
Somerset College · GBUniversity of Auckland · NZWomen's Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPremenstrual Syndrome (PMS) is the term for severe symptoms experienced by about 5% of menstruating women up to two weeks before their menstrual periods, but not at other times. Treatment with progesterone may restore a deficiency, or balance the level of progesterone with other menstrual hormones. Progesterone therapy may reduce the effects of falling progesterone levels on the brain or on electrolytes in the blood.

objectivesThe objectives were to determine if progesterone has been found to be an effective treatment for all or some premenstrual symptoms, and if adverse events associated with this treatment have been reported. SEARCH STRATEGY: We last searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group's Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2005), MEDLINE (1966 to 2005) and EMBASE (1980 to 2005) in March 2005, and PsycINFO (1806 to 2006) in April 2006. We contacted pharmaceutical companies for information about unpublished trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of progesterone on women with PMS diagnosed by at least two prospective cycles, without current psychiatric disorder. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers (BM and OF) extracted data independently, and decided on the trials to be included. OF wrote to the trial investigators to ask for missing data. MAIN

resultsWe considered 17 studies. We included two trials totaling 280 participants aged from 18 to 45 years. Of these 115 yielded analysable results. Both studies measured outcomes using subjective scales of symptom severity but made calculations as if they were interval data. The two studies differed in design, participants, dose of progesterone, how and when the dose was administered and in outcome measures. It was impossible to combine data in a meta-analysis. Adverse events which may or may not have been the side effects of the treatment, were generally described as mild. Both trials intended to exclude women whose symptoms continued after their periods; unfortunately the larger multicentre study had some ineligible participants. Overall, participants benefited more from progesterone than placebo. This was statistically significant in per protocol analysis but not in the intention-to-treat analysis, except for the first cycle. The smaller, crossover study found no statistically significant difference between oral progesterone, vaginally absorbed progesterone and placebo. AUTHORS'

conclusionsWe could not say that progesterone helped women with PMS, nor that it was ineffective. Neither trial distinguished a subgroup of women who benefited.

Indexed as

FemaleHumansPremenstrual SyndromeProgesteroneProgestinsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicProgesteroneProgestins

Identifiers

PMID17054168
OpenAlexW4249110645

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.