ArticleBMC women's health2019
The myth of menstruation: how menstrual regulation and suppression impact contraceptive choice.
Article in BMC women's health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Values and preferences for contraception: A global systematic review.Contraception · 2022Pooled it
- Contraception and Amenorrhea: An Exploratory Cross-Sectional Study on Acceptability in Filipino/Filipino-American Women.Journal of transcultural nursing : official journal of the Transcultural Nursing Society · 2026Article
- Contraceptive-induced menstrual changes in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic scoping review.Communications medicine · 2025Article
- Factors Influencing Contraceptive Use in Women Seeking First-Trimester Abortion Care: An Austrian Cross-Sectional Survey.Perspectives on sexual and reproductive health · 2025Article
- How Do We Measure Contraceptive Method Preferences? Evidence From a Scoping Review.Studies in family planning · 2025Article
- Attitudes Toward Menstrual Suppression Among Cyclic and Continuous Contraceptive Vaginal Ring Users in Kenya.Journal of family & reproductive health · 2023Article
- Perspectives on the side effects of hormonal contraceptives among women of reproductive age in Kitwe district of Zambia: a qualitative explorative study.BMC women's health · 2023Article
- "Sometimes I just forget them": capturing experiences of women about free menstrual products in a U.S. based public university campus.BMC women's health · 2023Article
- Jail as a Point of Contraceptive Care Access: Needs and Preferences Among Women in an Urban Jail.Journal of midwifery & women's health · 2021Article
- Healthy, safe and responsible: the modern female traveller.Tropical diseases, travel medicine and vaccines · 2021Review
- The myth of menstruation: how menstrual regulation and suppression impact contraceptive choice.BMC women's health · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWomen in the US have access to various hormonal contraceptive methods that can regulate menstruation. This study examined the attitudes and perceptions of reproductive-aged women toward contraceptive methods, including how menstrual regulation and suppression preferences influenced contraceptive choice.
methodsData collection used a mixed-methods approach, including 6 focus groups (n = 61), individual interviews (n = 18), and a web-based survey (n = 547).
resultsParticipants described contraceptive method preferences that allowed monthly bleeding and daily control, expressing concerns about long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) because of decreased user involvement. Some participants noted LARC improved their menstrual control. Many participants felt menstruation was healthy, whereas suppression was abnormal and resulted in negative health outcomes. Though participants indicated LARC as beneficial (M = 4.99 ± 1.66), convenient (M = 5.43 ± 1.68), and healthy (M = 4.62 ± 1.69), they chose combined oral contraceptives due to convenience.
conclusionsFindings suggest women need more information about menstrual regulation and suppression before selecting a contraceptive method, specifically in relation to LARC versus combined oral contraception. Framing menstrual suppression as healthy and natural may improve perceptions of long-term health consequences related to LARC. Providers should discuss menstrual suppression safety to ensure selection of contraceptive options aligning with women's preferences and needs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.