ArticleCureus2024
The Evaluation of Menstrual Alterations in Mexican Women After Vaccination Against COVID-19.
Article in Cureus, 2024. 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, 1 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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Menstrual changes after COVID-19 vaccination suggest a secondary connection to the immune response to vaccination rather than a specific component of the vaccine. The evaluation of these alterations in women with the same and multiple vaccination schedules will provide valuable information. Methods An observational, cross-sectional study was carried out; data were collected through a survey of 164 vaccinated women at the American British Cowdray (ABC) Santa Fe Medical Center Hospital in Mexico City. The survey was validated by the Delphi method. Results The survey was applied from March 2023 to February 2024. Post-vaccination menstrual alterations occurred in 48.1%; the most frequent alteration was menorrhagia in 20.7% and pain accompanied by menstruation in 27.4%. Fifty-seven percent had a history of previous COVID-19 infection. There were no significant associations between changes in menstrual bleeding after vaccination, history of COVID-19 infection, and age group (p>0.9). However, women who received multiple doses of vaccines had a higher risk of suffering abnormalities in bleeding by 36.6%. Conclusion The incidence of menstrual disorders in this study post COVID-19 vaccination was 49%. Menstrual alterations in patients who received multiple doses and a single regimen were similar at 47% and 48%, where there is no statistical significance. The greatest number of menstrual alterations was seen in the first dose at 36%, probably due to the immunity they acquired after the different types of vaccination. Vaccination is a very effective way to prevent the severity of COVID-19 infection; it has an impact on menstrual bleeding in terms of menorrhagia and metrorrhagia. Vaccination against COVID-19 is associated with small changes in the menstrual cycle, without statistical significance. Women receiving the first dose of the vaccine had changes in the amount of bleeding specifically the amount.
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.