Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22419287›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2012

Progesterone for premenstrual syndrome.

Olive Ford, Anne Lethaby, Helen Roberts, Ben Willem J Mol

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 6 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors for premenstrual syndrome.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013
    Pooled it
  7. Review
  8. Impact of age on premenstrual syndrome prevalence and severity: A population-based survey in Brazil.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025
    Observational
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Management of Premenstrual Dysphoric Disorder: A Scoping Review.International journal of women's health · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Olive FordOver Stratton, South Petherton, Somerset, TA 13 5LL, UK. oliveford1@btinternet.com.
Anne Lethaby
Helen Roberts
Ben Willem J Mol

Funding

Medical Research Council G0500952
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAbout 5% of women experience severe symptoms called premenstrual syndrome (PMS), only in the two weeks before their menstrual periods. Treatment with progesterone may restore a deficiency, balance menstrual hormone levels or reduce 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

methodsWe searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group's Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO to February 2011. We contacted pharmaceutical companies for information about unpublished trials, for the first version of this review.The search strings are in Appendix 2. 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 which trials to include. OF wrote to trial investigators for missing data. MAIN

resultsFrom 17 studies, only two met our inclusion criteria. Together they had 280 participants aged between 18 and 45 years. One hundred and fifteen yielded analysable results. Both studies measured symptom severity using subjective scales. Differing in design, participants, dose of progesterone and how delivered, the studies could not be combined in meta-analysis.Adverse events which may or may not have been side effects of the treatment were described as mild.Both trials had defects. They intended to exclude women whose symptoms continued after their periods. When data from ineligible women were excluded from analysis in one trial, the other women were found to have benefited more from progesterone than placebo. The smaller study found no statistically significant difference between oral progesterone, vaginally absorbed progesterone and placebo, but reported outcomes incompletely. AUTHORS'

conclusionsThe trials did not show that progesterone is an effective treatment for PMS nor that it is not. Neither trial distinguished a subgroup of women who benefited, nor examined claimed success with high doses.

Indexed as

FemaleHumansPremenstrual SyndromeProgesteroneProgestinsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicProgesteroneProgestins

Identifiers

PMID22419287
PMCPMC7154383

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.