Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19370576›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2009

Oral contraceptive pill as treatment for primary dysmenorrhoea.

Chooi L Wong, Cindy Farquhar, Helen Roberts, Michelle Proctor

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 124 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Beta2-adrenoceptor agonists for dysmenorrhoea.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. The Establishment of a Mouse Model of Recurrent Primary Dysmenorrhea.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Chooi L WongO & G , FMHS , Auckland , New Zealand. cwon164@ec.auckland.ac.nz
Cindy Farquhar
Helen Roberts
Michelle Proctor
Auckland University of Technology · NZUniversity of Auckland · NZWomen's Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDysmenorrhoea (painful menstrual cramps) is common. Combined OCPs are recommended in the management of primary dysmenorrhoea.

objectivesTo determine the effectiveness and safety of combined oral contraceptive pills for the management of primary dysmenorrhoea. SEARCH STRATEGY: We conducted electronic searches for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Register of controlled trials CENTRAL, CCTR, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL (first conducted in 2001, updated on 5 November 2008). SELECTION CRITERIA: RCTs comparing all combined OCPs with other combined OCPs, placebo, no management, or management with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatories (NSAIDs) were considered. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Twenty three studies were identified and ten were included. Six compared the combined OCP with placebo and four compared different dosages of combined OCP. MAIN

resultsOne study of low dose oestrogen and four studies of medium dose oestrogen combined OCPs compared with placebo, for a combined total of 497 women, reported pain improvement. For the outcome of pain relief across the different OCPs wthe pooled OR suggested benefit with OCPs compared to placebo (7 RCTs: Peto OR 2.01 [95% CI 1.32, 3.08]).The Chi-squared test for heterogeneity showed there is significant heterogeneity with an I(2) statistic of 64% and a significant chi-square test (14.06, df=5, p=0.02). A sensitivity analysis removing the studies with inadequate allocation concealment suggested significant benefit of treatment with the pooled OR of 2.99 (95% CI 1.76, 5.07) and hereterogeneity no longer statistically significant and I(2) statistic of 0%.Three studies reported adverse effects (Davis 2005; Hendrix 2002; GPRG 1968) The adverse effects were nausea, headaches and weight gain. Two studies reported if women experienced any side effect and no evidence of an effect was found (3 RCTs: OR = 1.45 (95% 0.71, 2.94). There was no evidence of statistical heterogeneity.There were no studies identified that compated combined OCP versus non steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. There was no evidence of a difference for the pooled studies for 3rd generation progestagens (OR = 1.11 (95% CI 0.79 - 1.57)). For the 2nd generation versus 3rd generation the OR was 0.44 (95% CI 0.23-0.84) suggesting benefit of the 3rd generation OCP but this was for a single study (Winkler 2003). AUTHORS'

conclusionsThere is limited evidence for pain improvement with the use of the OCP (both low and medium dose oestrogen) in women with dysmenorrhoea. There is no evidence of a difference between different OCP preparations.

Indexed as

Contraceptives, Oral, CombinedDysmenorrheaFemaleHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicContraceptives, Oral, Combined

Identifiers

PMID19370576
OpenAlexW1708141466

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.