ArticlePloS one2022
Association of fish intake with menstrual pain: A cross-sectional study of the Japan Environment and Children's Study.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The relationship between fish eating habits and menstrual pain is unknown. Elucidating this relationship can inform dietary guidance for reproductive age women with menstrual pain. The aim of this study was to clarify the relationship between fish intake frequency/preference and menstrual pain. This cross-sectional study was conducted at the Miyagi Regional Center as an adjunct study of the Japan Environment and Children's Study, and 2060 eligible women (mean age, 31.9 years) participated. Fish intake frequency ("< 1 time/week," "1 time/week," "2-3 times/week," or "≥ 4 times/week"), preference ("like," "neutral," or "dislike"), and menstrual pain (no/mild or moderate-to-severe) were assessed at 1.5 years after the last delivery through self-administered questionnaires. The association between fish intake frequency/preference and prevalence of moderate-to-severe menstrual pain was evaluated through logistic regression analyses. Our results show that, compared with the "< 1 time/week" (38.0%) group, the "1 time/week" (26.9%), "2-3 times/week" (27.8%), and "≥ 4 times/week" (23.9%) groups showed a lower prevalence of moderate-to-severe menstrual pain (p < 0.01). The prevalence of moderate-to-severe menstrual pain was 27.7%, 27.6%, and 34.4% in the "like," "neutral," and "dislike" groups, respectively. Multivariate logistic regression showed that frequent fish intake was associated with a lower prevalence of moderate-to-severe menstrual pain ("1 time/week": odds ratio [OR] = 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41-0.86, "2-3 times/week": OR = 0.64; 95% CI, 0.45-0.90 and "≥ 4 times/week": OR = 0.52; 95% CI, 0.34-0.80; trend p = 0.004). Multivariate logistic regression showed no association between fish preference and moderate-to-severe menstrual pain ("dislike" vs "like": OR = 1.16; 95% CI, 0.78-1.73). There was a significant negative association between fish intake frequency and menstrual pain. It is suggested that fish intake can reduce or prevent menstrual pain.
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.