ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2023
Migraine and Hormonal Contraception in Gynecological Outpatient Care-Cross-Sectional Study among Practicing Gynecologists in Germany.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cardiometabolic, Glycaemic, and Metabolic Safety of Hormonal Contraceptives in Women with Medical Conditions: A Systematic Review.International journal of women's health · 2026Review
- From Headache to Heart Health: Investigating the Migraine-Cardiovascular Disease Connection.Neurology and therapy · 2025Review
- Global, regional, and national burden and trends of migraine among women of childbearing age from 1990 to 2021: insights from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021.The journal of headache and pain · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hormonal contraception (HC) can influence the migraine burden and should be considered in the comprehensive management of women with migraine. In this study, we aim to investigate the influence of migraine and migraine aura on the prescribing behavior of combined oral contraception (COC) and progestogen monotherapy (PM) in gynecological outpatient care. From October 2021 to March 2022, we performed an observational, cross-sectional study using a self-administered online-based survey. The questionnaire was distributed by mail and e-mail among 11,834 practicing gynecologists in Germany using the publicly available contact information. A total of 851 gynecologists responded to the questionnaire, of whom 12% never prescribe COC in the presence of migraine. Further 75% prescribe COC depending on the presence of limiting factors such as cardiovascular risk factors and comorbidities. When deciding to start PM, migraine appears to be less relevant, as 82% prescribe PM without restrictions. In the presence of aura, 90% of gynecologists do not prescribe COC at all, while PM is prescribed in 53% without restrictions. Almost all gynecologists reported to be actively involved in migraine therapy by having already initiated (80%), discontinued (96%), or changed (99%) HC due to migraine. Our results reveal that participating gynecologists actively consider migraine and migraine aura before and while prescribing HC. Gynecologists appear cautious in prescribing HC in patients with migraine aura.
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.