ArticleEuropean journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology2025
Association between menstrual pad usage, self-reported symptoms, and menstrual blood loss measured by the alkaline hematin method.
Article in European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAccurate assessment of heavy menstrual bleeding is necessary to determine effectiveness of therapeutic interventions. There are limited quantitative methods for evaluating heavy menstrual bleeding, as the validated alkaline hematin method has practical limitations, so alternative methods are needed.
objectiveTo evaluate the correlation between self-reported heavy menstrual bleeding, pad usage, and menstrual blood loss measured using the alkaline hematin method. STUDY
designIn this multicenter, prospective cohort study, 79 participants aged 18-50 years, who self-reported heavy menstrual bleeding, were recruited from February to November 2023. Participants provided demographic and medical history details and used study-provided pads during one menstrual cycle. Study outcomes were number of pads used per cycle and quantified menstrual blood loss measured using the alkaline hematin method. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics.
resultsThe median menstrual blood loss per cycle was 66.1 mL (IQR 28.7-122.5 mL), with only 25.3 % (20/79) of participants exceeding the heavy menstrual bleeding threshold of 120 mL. Participants with heavy menstrual bleeding used a median of 21.5 pads per cycle (IQR 15.8-25.3 pads) while those with normal menstrual blood loss only used 11 pads per cycle (IQR 8-15 pads).
conclusionThis study found a discrepancy between self-reported and objectively measured heavy menstrual bleeding. Heavy menstrual bleeding is associated with greater pad usage per cycle, however there is overlap in pad usage between participants with normal and heavy menstrual bleeding. Accurate quantification of menstrual blood is crucial for clinical management and research, as self-reported measures may not reliably identify heavy menstrual bleeding.
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.