ArticleReproductive health2026
How well do women understand their menstrual cycles? Insights from 383,085 UK based women.
Article in Reproductive health, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMenstrual cycle awareness is a critical yet frequently overlooked component of reproductive health; it shapes an individual’s ability to recognise changes in their cycle, seek timely medical care when needed, and make informed decisions. However, many women of reproductive age lack essential understanding about their cycles, contributing to widespread misconceptions, stigma, and delays in healthcare engagement. This study explores menstrual cycle awareness, the perceptions of cycle regularity, and demographic disparities among UK-based women.
methodsThis was a retrospective, cross-sectional analysis of self-reported menstrual cycle data collected through an online health assessment (OHA) between September 2020 and January 2025 from 383,085 UK-based women aged 18–50 years. Participants reported cycle regularity, cycle length, and period length, alongside demographic and reproductive characteristics.
resultsOverall, 22.2% of participants reported not knowing their cycle length, with uncertainty highest among those under 25 years (33.4%). Awareness increased with age before declining slightly after age 45. Awareness of period length was higher than cycle length awareness; however, 9.5% of participants were unable to report period length, rising to 13.8% among those under 25. Among participants who described their cycles as regular and reported a cycle length, 4.9% reported cycle lengths outside commonly referenced regular range (21–35 days), indicating discordance between perceived regularity and reported cycle length. This discordance was most pronounced among younger participants and varied modestly across ethnic groups. Participants who had previously been pregnant or were actively trying to conceive demonstrated higher cycle length awareness.
conclusionsThese findings highlight persistent gaps in menstrual cycle awareness among UK-based women, particularly among younger individuals and those not actively engaged in fertility planning. Discordance between perceived cycle regularity and cycle length reference ranges suggests that many individuals may lack a clear framework for interpreting their menstrual patterns. Improving population-level education and clinical engagement around menstrual cycle awareness beyond fertility-focused contexts may support earlier recognition of potential menstrual health concerns and more timely healthcare engagement.
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.