ArticleThe Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology2026
Heavy Menstrual Bleeding: Experiences and Learnings From Patient Survey.
Article in The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHeavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) affects 1 in 4 women. It is often debilitating for those experiencing it, resulting in negative impacts on quality of life. Prompted by a national call for better insights into the management of HMB, the authors sought to collect patient feedback regarding access to HMB treatment alongside satisfaction with care, including treatment side effects, decision regret and the alignment of patient and clinician treatment goals.
aimsThis study aimed to gather patient feedback on the management of HMB treatment access, satisfaction, side effects, decision regret and alignment of patient and clinician treatment goals.
methodsA retrospective recall survey was distributed to eligible participants at a single referral centre in regional Victoria, Australia. The survey was sent out to 1241 women who received treatment for heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) between 01/01/2018 and 01/05/2023.
resultsThere were 150 respondents to the survey, with 84% reporting a wait time of less than 2 months to see a clinician. Satisfaction with symptom control was reported by 96.9% of hysterectomy patients, while 9.3% reported intolerable side effects and 7.7% expressed regret. Symptom control was less effective for oral hormones (39.5%), non-oral hormones (62.5%) and Mirena (48.4%), which also had higher rates of intolerable side effects (47.2%, 62.5% and 42%) and regret (18%, 41.7% and 27.4%).
conclusionThe study underscores the need for personalised patient care in managing HMB, emphasising the importance of educating patients about treatment outcomes to support informed decision-making.
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.