ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025
Real-world effects of hyoscine butylbromide combined with paracetamol in women with dysmenorrhea: a patient survey.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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.
- Holistic approach to dysmenorrhea management: Integrating pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions for improved women's health in the Middle East and Africa.BMC women's health · 2025Review
- A real-world study to describe the effectiveness and usage patterns of hyoscine butylbromide plus tablets in patients with dysmenorrhoea.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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Dysmenorrhea symptoms are frequent and often self-treated using non-prescription medicines. Methods: To further characterize women with dysmenorrhea using a combination of hyoscine butylbromide plus paracetamol (PLUS) for self-management of their complaints, we performed a secondary analysis of a published pharmacy-based patient survey. Results: A total of 314 women (mean age: 32.3 years) with dysmenorrhea reported a pain and cramps intensity of 7.45 ± 2.13 (means ± SD) on a 0-10 Likert scale, which was reduced to 2.86 ± 1.81 upon treatment. Associated impairments of work/daily chores, leisure activities, and sleep were improved by 64.6, 62.2, and 70.4%, respectively. The onset of symptom relief was within 60 min in 84.7%. Tolerability was rated as very good or good by 97.2%; 82.8% were repeat users, 97.5% reported their intention to purchase the product again, and 97.1% reported their intention to recommend it to relatives, friends, and colleagues. Discussion: These findings confirm the efficacy and tolerability data on PLUS from randomized controlled trials in a larger group of women conducting self-management of their dysmenorrhea in a real-world setting. Future studies should compare PLUS to other non-prescription treatments.
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.