ArticleBJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology2025
The Burden of Poor Reproductive Health in England: Results From a Cross-Sectional Survey.
Article in BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Coordinating Fertility Preservation in Children and Young Adults at Risk of Treatment-Induced Infertility: A Commentary.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2026Article
- Preference for Face-to-Face Contraceptive Service Delivery Post-COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cross-Sectional Study.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2025Article
- Factors Associated With Contraceptive Initiation and Use Among Women Who Have Given Birth in the Last Year: Findings From the 2023 Women's Reproductive Health Survey.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2025Article
- Reproductive health and healthcare experiences in autistic and non-autistic individuals assigned female at birth.Women's health (London, England)Article
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
objectiveTo quantify the burden of poor reproductive health in England by age, ethnicity, and financial security.
designCross-sectional survey.
settingEngland. SAMPLE: 59 332 women and people assigned female at birth aged 16-55 years.
methodsThe Reproductive Health Survey for England 2023 (RHSE2023) used an online convenience sampling strategy and a self-completion questionnaire.
main outcome measures13 indicators of reproductive health organised into three domains: reproductive morbidities (including endometriosis, fibroids); menstrual health (severely painful and/or heavy periods; menopausal symptoms); and pregnancy-related adverse experiences (pregnancy loss, infertility, unplanned pregnancy) in the last year.
resultsCompared to the general population, our sample over-represented those with higher education levels and under-represented minority ethnic groups. 28.0% of participants reported at least one reproductive morbidity; 61.9% reported menstrual-related issue(s); and 5.5% reported pregnancy-related adverse experience(s) in the last year, with considerable variation by age. Compiling the three domains, 73.7% reported at least one indicator of poor reproductive health. Inequalities were observed: Black British, Caribbean, and African women had increased odds of reporting reproductive morbidity (aOR: 1.69); heavy and/or severely painful periods (aOR: 1.28); and pregnancy-related adverse experience (aOR: 1.50). Financial insecurity was also associated with poor reproductive health.
conclusionsAs the first study to simultaneously examine this broad range of indicators of reproductive health within a single sample, we highlight the substantial burden of poor reproductive health in England, with evident ethnic and financial inequalities.
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.