ArticleJournal of women's health (2002)2026
Use of Chemical Hair Straighteners and Menstrual Disturbances.
Article in Journal of women's health (2002), 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
backgroundUse of chemical hair straighteners ("relaxers") is associated with higher risks of hormonally mediated conditions. We hypothesized users of relaxers would have a higher prevalence of abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) and dysmenorrhea. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe analyzed baseline data from Pregnancy Study Online, an internet-based preconception cohort study of North American pregnancy planners. We included 14,366 participants aged 21-39 years who enrolled during 2014-2024 and reported on their typical menstrual cycle characteristics when not using hormones. We collected data on history of use, age at first use, frequency per year, duration of use, and number of burns. We defined AUB as cycle length <24 or >38 days, flow ≥ 7 days, irregular cycles, and/or heavy flow (>30 pads/tampons per menses). We defined dysmenorrhea as severe cramps requiring medication and bed rest. We used modified Poisson regression models to estimate prevalence ratios (PRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the associations of relaxer use with AUB and dysmenorrhea, adjusted for potential confounders.
resultsOverall, 2% of participants were current users and 10% were former users of relaxers. The frequencies of AUB and dysmenorrhea were 31% and 8%, respectively. PRs for current (versus never) relaxer use were 1.16 (95% CI: 1.00-1.33) for AUB and 1.30 (95% CI: 0.94-1.80) for dysmenorrhea. Participants who reported ever experiencing burns (versus never use) had a higher prevalence of dysmenorrhea (1-4 burns: PR = 1.42, 95% CI: 1.04-1.93; ≥5 burns: PR = 1.46, 95% CI: 1.00-2.13).
conclusionRelaxer use was associated with a higher prevalence of menstrual disturbances.
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.