ArticleBMC health services research2025
Improving care experiences for premenstrual symptoms and disorders in the United Kingdom (UK): a mixed-methods approach.
Article in BMC health services research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Global Burden of Premenstrual Syndrome and Uterine Fibroids in Women of Reproductive Age (1990-2023) and Projections to 2050: An Analysis of the Global Burden of Disease Study 2023.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Identification and evaluation of barriers and facilitators to formal help-seeking for premenstrual symptoms in the UK: a mixed methods approach.Frontiers in global 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPoor care experiences are reported for premenstrual disorders, which may result in negative outcomes such as distress, reduced healthcare engagement, and delays to diagnosis. This research aimed to explore healthcare experiences for premenstrual symptoms in the United Kingdom and identify areas for potential improvements based on participant responses.
methodAn online survey was delivered, with participants recruited via social media. Experiences of care were explored using quantitative and qualitative questions. Quantitative data were explored using descriptive statistics, with group differences investigated using Mann-Whitney U tests and chi-square tests as appropriate. Qualitative data regarding care improvements was explored using inductive thematic analysis.
resultsThe sample included 339 participants who completed at least 97% of the survey, reported premenstrual symptoms in consecutive cycles, and had sought formal help for these symptoms. Mean age was 34.66 (SD = 5.88), with the majority identifying as women (n = 332, 97.94%) and white/Caucasian (n = 311, 91.74%). 75.22% (n = 255) felt that care was poor. 44.25% (n = 150) felt their symptoms were not taken seriously. 37.76% perceived a lack of healthcare professional knowledge (n = 128). The majority did not receive recommendations of non-formal sources of help (i.e., websites, support groups; 84.96%, n = 288) or lifestyle changes (74.63%, n = 253). Better care experiences were associated with healthcare professionals taking symptoms seriously (U = 1383.00, p < .001), higher perceived healthcare professional knowledge (U = 1370.50, p < .001), and receiving recommendations of non-formal sources of help (X
conclusionsPoor care experiences for premenstrual symptoms in the UK are characterised by dismissive attitudes and perceived lack of knowledge. Improved training provision for healthcare professionals is required to address this and other aspects of care identified by qualitative analysis. However, research is needed to identify appropriate methods to deliver training. Utilisation of standardised screening tools and patient-centred communication will likely ensure comprehensive assessments and reduce self-advocacy burdens.
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.