Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32599565›Full record

ReviewJournal of molecular endocrinology2020

90 YEARS OF PROGESTERONE: Selective progesterone receptor modulators in gynaecological therapies.

H O D Critchley, R R Chodankar

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of molecular endocrinology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Problems associated with the ATC system of drug classification.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Design, Synthesis, and Evaluation ofMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
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

2 authors.

H O D CritchleyMRC Centre for Reproductive Health, The University of Edinburgh, The Queen's Medical Research Institute, Edinburgh Bioquarter, Edinburgh, UK.
R R ChodankarMRC Centre for Reproductive Health, The University of Edinburgh, The Queen's Medical Research Institute, Edinburgh Bioquarter, Edinburgh, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council G0500047Medical Research Council G9523250Medical Research Council MR/J003611/1Medical Research Council MR/N022556/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) is a chronic, debilitating and common condition affecting one in four women of reproductive age. Current treatments (conservative, medical and surgical) may be unsuitable, poorly tolerated or may result in loss of fertility. Selective progesterone receptor modulators (SPRMs) influence progesterone-regulated pathways, a hormone critical to female reproductive health and disease; therefore, SPRMs hold great potential in fulfilling an unmet need in managing gynaecological disorders. SPRMs in current clinical use include RU486 (mifepristone), which is licensed for pregnancy interruption, and CDB-2914 (ulipristal acetate), licensed for managing AUB in women with leiomyomas and in a higher dose as an emergency contraceptive. In this article, we explore the clinical journey of SPRMs and the need for further interrogation of this class of drugs with the ultimate goal of improving women's quality of life.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicContraceptionFemaleGenital Diseases, FemaleHumansProgesteroneProgesterone CongenersReceptors, ProgesteroneProgesteroneProgesterone CongenersReceptors, Progesteroneabnormal uterine bleeding (AUB)fibroidheavy menstrual bleeding (HMB)leiomyomaselective progesterone receptor modulators (SPRM)

Identifiers

PMID32599565
PMCPMC7354704

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.