ArticleBMC public health2024
The 2017 Women's Health Initiative study and use of hormone therapy: an emulated repeated cross-sectional study.
Article in BMC public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Mapping Women-Only Health Research in Taiwan: A Bibliometric Analysis of Research Trends, Collaboration, and Thematic Clusters (2015-2025).Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHormone therapy (HT) use among menopausal women declined after negative information from the 2002 Women's Health Initiative (WHI) HT study. The 2017 post-intervention follow-up WHI study revealed that HT did not increase long-term mortality. However, studies on the effects of the updated WHI findings are lacking. Thus, we assessed the impact of the 2017 WHI findings on HT use in Taiwan.
methodsWe identified 1,869,050 women aged 50-60 years, between June and December 2017, from health insurance claims data to compare HT use in the 3 months preceding and following September 2017. To address the limitations associated with interval-censored data, we employed an emulated repeated cross-sectional design. Using logistic regression analysis, we evaluated the impact of the 2017 WHI study on menopausal symptom-related outpatient visits and HT use. In a scenario analysis, we examined the impact of the 2002 trial on HT use to validate our study design.
resultsStudy participants' baseline characteristics before and after the 2017 WHI study were not significantly different. Logistic regressions demonstrated that the 2017 study had no significant effect on outpatient visits for menopause-related symptoms or HT use among women with outpatient visits. The scenario analysis confirmed the negative impact of the 2002 WHI trial on HT use.
conclusionsThe 2017 WHI study did not demonstrate any impact on either menopause-related outpatient visits or HT use among middle-aged women in Taiwan. Our emulated cross-sectional study design may be employed in similar population-based policy intervention studies using interval-censored data.
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.