Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31248919›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2019

Productivity loss due to menstruation-related symptoms: a nationwide cross-sectional survey among 32 748 women.

Mark E Schoep, Eddy M M Adang, Jacques W M Maas, Bianca De Bie, Johanna W M Aarts, Theodoor E Nieboer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 122 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
122citing papers in PubMed, 7 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

122 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

62 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Mark E SchoepDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Eddy M M AdangDepartment of Health Evidence, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Jacques W M MaasObstetrics & Gynaecology, Maxima Medical Centre locatie Veldhoven, Veldhoven, The Netherlands.
Bianca De BieDutch Patient Endometriosis Foundation, Numansdorp, The Netherlands.
Johanna W M AartsDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Theodoor E NieboerDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate age-dependent productivity loss caused by menstruation-related symptoms, measured in absenteeism (time away from work or school) and presenteeism (productivity loss while present at work or school).

methodsDesign/setting: internet-based, cross-sectional survey conducted in the Netherlands from July to October 2017.

participants32 748 women aged 15-45 years, recruited through social media. OUTCOME MEASURES: self-reported lost productivity in days, divided into absenteeism and presenteeism; impact of menstrual symptoms; reasons women give when calling in sick; and women's preferences regarding the implications of menstruation-related symptoms for schools and workplaces.

resultsA total of 13.8% (n=4514) of all women reported absenteeism during their menstrual periods with 3.4% (n=1108) reporting absenteeism every or almost every menstrual cycle. The mean absenteeism related to a woman's period was 1.3 days per year. A total of 80.7% (n=26 438) of the respondents reported presenteeism and decreased productivity a mean of 23.2 days per year. An average productivity loss of 33% resulted in a mean of 8.9 days of total lost productivity per year due to presenteeism. Women under 21 years were more likely to report absenteeism due to menstruation-related symptoms (OR 3.3, 95% CI 3.1 to 3.6). When women called in sick due to their periods, only 20.1% (n=908) told their employer or school that their absence was due to menstrual complaints. Notably, 67.7% (n=22 154) of the participants wished they had greater flexibility in their tasks and working hours at work or school during their periods.

conclusionsMenstruation-related symptoms cause a great deal of lost productivity, and presenteeism is a bigger contributor to this than absenteeism. There is an urgent need for more focus on the impact of these symptoms, especially in women aged under 21 years, for discussions of treatment options with women of all ages and, ideally, more flexibility for women who work or go to school.

Indexed as

AbsenteeismEfficiencyAdolescentAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansLogistic ModelsMenstruationMiddle AgedNetherlandsPresenteeismSchoolsSelf ReportWorkplaceYoung Adultabsenteeismcommunity gynaecologymenstrual cyclemenstruationpresenteeism

Identifiers

PMID31248919
PMCPMC6597634

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.