ArticleVaccine: X2024
The association of COVID-19 vaccination and menstrual health: A period-tracking app-based cohort study.
Article in Vaccine: X, 2024. 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.
- A Foundation Model for Capturing Complexity of Menstrual Health Data.npj women's health · 2026Article
- Decoding menstrual health across the lifespan: a scoping review of digital health tools in research.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Decoding menstrual health across the lifespan: a scoping review of digital health tools in research.npj women's health · 2026Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
Background: In initial COVID-19 clinical trials, menstrual health was not formally monitored, yet anecdotal reports of menstruation changes surfaced on social media. This study aims to assess the association between COVID-19 vaccines and menstruation using Clue, a period-tracking application. Study design: A survey assessing demographics, menstrual health, stress levels, and COVID-19 vaccination was sent to Clue users between 12/7/2021 and 2/9/2022. Inclusion criteria were (1) 18 years or older (2) currently menstruating (3) not pregnant or breastfeeding since 1/2020. Menstrual data was collected for each participant. Users with cycle lengths more than 90 days were excluded. Cycle lengths were calculated for the 6-month average pre-vaccination (PRIOR), the cycle during which vaccination was administered (DURING), the cycle following DURING (AFTER1), and the cycle following AFTER1 (AFTER2). For periods, individuals were stratified based on whether vaccination was received during their menstrual period (DURING). Period lengths were additionally calculated for the 6-month average pre-vaccination (PRIOR), the first period following vaccination (AFTER1), and the period following AFTER1 (AFTER2). For unvaccinated participants, an index date (4/1/2022) was used to similarly designate menstrual cycles and periods. For each participant, cycle length changes for DURING, AFTER1, and AFTER2 compared to PRIOR were determined. Student's Results: Of 7,559 participants, 6,897 (91 %) were vaccinated. Compared to PRIOR, individuals vaccinated during their menstrual period demonstrated a statistically significant increase in the DURING period length, but not AFTER1 (p = 0.463) and AFTER2 (p = 0.692). No statistically significant changes were observed in period lengths of those vaccinated in between periods or in cycle lengths overall. Conclusion: A small but statistically significant change in period length was observed only in individuals vaccinated for COVID-19 during their menstrual period. Providers can better counsel menstruating individuals to reduce vaccine misinformation.
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.