Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34379634›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Menopausal hormone therapy: Characterising users in an Australian national cross-sectional study.

Louiza S Velentzis, Sam Egger, Emily Banks, Karen Canfell

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Louiza S VelentzisDaffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, a joint venture with Cancer Council NSW, Woolloomooloo, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9309-0492
Sam EggerDaffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, a joint venture with Cancer Council NSW, Woolloomooloo, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1808-6909
Emily BanksNational Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health, Research School of Population Health, Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
Karen CanfellDaffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, a joint venture with Cancer Council NSW, Woolloomooloo, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
The University of Sydney · AUAustralian National University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) is effective for menopausal symptoms, however, its use is also associated with risks of serious health conditions including breast, ovarian and endometrial cancer, stroke and venous thromboembolism. MHT-related health risks increase with longer durations of use. In Australia, while overall MHT use fell when risk-related findings were published in 2002, a significant number of women continue using MHT long-term. We aimed to examine socio-demographic, health-related and lifestyle characteristics in relation to post-2002 MHT use, and to compare use for <5 and ≥5 years. Data from 1,561 participants from an Australian, national, cross-sectional survey of women aged 50-69 in 2013 were analysed. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated using logistic regression for characteristics related to overall MHT use post-2002 and multinomial logistic regression for associations between MHT duration of use [never/<5 years/≥5 years] and personal characteristics, adjusting for sociodemographic, reproductive, health and lifestyle factors. Post-2002 MHT use was associated with increasing age (p-trend<0.001), hysterectomy versus no hysterectomy (OR:2.55, 95%CI = 1.85-3.51), bilateral oophorectomy vs no oophorectomy (OR:1.66, 95%CI = 1.09-2.53), and ever- versus never-use of therapies other than MHT for menopausal symptoms (OR:1.93, 95%CI = 1.48-2.57). Women with prior breast cancer (OR:0.35, 95%CI = 0.17-0.74) and with more children (p-trend = 0.034) were less likely than other women to use MHT. Prior hysterectomy was more strongly associated with MHT use for ≥5 years than for <5 years (p = 0.004). Ever-use of non-MHT menopausal therapies was associated with MHT use for <5 years but not with longer-term use (p = 0.004). This study reinforces the need for MHT users and their clinicians to re-evaluate continued MHT use on an ongoing basis.

Indexed as

AgedAustraliaCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHormone Replacement TherapyHumansLife StyleMenopauseMiddle AgedRisk FactorsSocioeconomic FactorsTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID34379634
PMCPMC8357145
OpenAlexW3191178887

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.