ArticleBiology2022
Association between RNAm-Based COVID-19 Vaccines and Permanency of Menstrual Cycle Alterations in Spanish Women: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Menstrual disorders following COVID-19 vaccination: a review using a systematic search.Frontiers in drug safety and regulation · 2024Pooled it
- Effectiveness of a respiratory rehabilitation program including an inspiration training devicePeerJ · 2023Trial
- Impact of COVID-19 Vaccination on Menstrual Irregularities, Bleeding Patterns, and Cycle Duration: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Health science reports · 2025Review
- Effects of vaccination against COVID-19 on overactive bladder symptoms on young population.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- Health and Well-Being through COVID-19 Vaccination: Physical, Oral, and Psychological Effects.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The purpose of this study was to delve more deeply into the medium and long-term relation between mRNA-based vaccines and changes in menstrual pain, cycle length, and amount of bleeding in Spanish women. Material and Methods: A total of 746 women (63% between 18−30 and 37% between 31−45 years old) participated in the study. A numerical rating scale was used for recording pain intensity, a pictorial chart for menstrual bleeding, and data from menstrual cycle duration, type of vaccine, number of doses and time from vaccination. Results: Sixty-five per cent of the women perceived changes in their menstrual cycle after receiving the vaccines, irrespective of type of vaccine or number of doses; all p values were >0.05. Most of them (n = 316 out of 484) reported more than one alteration in their menstrual cycle. Almost half of the participants had been vaccinated over 5 months (45%), 3−4 months (15%) 2−3 months (26%), and one month or less (13%) before. The percentage of women that reported alterations remained strongly constant across time, p > 0.05, ranging from 64 to 65%. Conclusions: Reported alterations in Spanish women after COVID vaccination remained more than 5 months after the last dose.
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.