Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39643997›Full record

ReviewHematology. American Society of Hematology. Education Program2024

Quantifying menorrhagia and overview of nonsurgical management of heavy menstrual bleeding.

Allison P Wheeler, Celeste O Hemingway

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Hematology. American Society of Hematology. Education Program, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Menstrual bleeding-specific quality of life in women on antiplatelet therapy.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Allison P WheelerDivisions of Hematology/Oncology & Pediatric Hematology/Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.
Celeste O HemingwayDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) is a common problem, presenting in 1 in 5 females. The quantification of menstrual blood loss and the subsequent treatment of HMB are both nuanced tasks that require the physician to consider the patient perspective. The individualization of care and transition to methods that fit each individual patient are critical to building a successful relationship with the patient to facilitate follow-up care and evaluation of response to treatment. In this review we outline various methods of quantification of menstrual blood loss, including considerations of accuracy and practicality. These methods, all of which have the potential for clinical benefit, vary from pictorial assessment charts to the gold standard alkaline hematin method to asking the patient about their average amount of blood loss and how it affects their quality of life. Next, we outline nonsurgical treatments for HMB, including hormonal and nonhormonal options, and consider the potential for success, as well as treatment considerations and contraindications. Overall, options for the evaluation and nonsurgical management of menstrual blood loss and HMB are presented along with quality-of-life considerations.

Indexed as

MenorrhagiaQuality of LifeFemaleHumans

Identifiers

PMID39643997
PMCPMC11665629

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.