ReviewPrzeglad menopauzalny = Menopause review2026
Menopause and mental health: clinical evidence and public discourse.
Review in Przeglad menopauzalny = Menopause review, 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The global discourse surrounding menopause has undergone a seismic shift, transitioning from clinical silence to a hyper-visible cultural phenomenon. However, this "menopausal turn" has introduced a significant paradox: while visibility reduces stigma, it frequently replaces clinical nuance with market-driven, reductive narratives. This paper provides a comprehensive bio-psycho-social synthesis of the menopause transition, bridging the gap between emerging neurobiological evidence and contemporary public discourse. We examine the neuroendocrine basis of perimenopausal mood changes, illustrating how fluctuating ovarian steroids - specifically oestradiol and progesterone - modulate serotonergic, dopaminergic, and GABAergic systems to create a window of psychiatric vulnerability. Challenging the "oestrogen deficiency" monocausal model, we integrate epidemiological data from major longitudinal cohorts, such as the Study of Women's Health Across the Nation, to highlight the "domino effect" of vasomotor symptoms, sleep fragmentation, and pre-existing psychosocial stressors. A critical focus is placed on the diagnostic attribution bias prevalent across medical specialties. We argue that primary care and psychiatry often operate through divergent "disciplinary lenses," leading to the misattribution of symptoms and fragmented care pathways. Furthermore, we critique the commercialisation of the "wellness" industry, which often leverages "femvertising" to promote non-clinical solutions that mask complex neurobiological realities. Ultimately, this paper advocates for a nuanced, interdisciplinary framework. By reconciling physiological evidence with the lived sociocultural experience, healthcare providers can move beyond superficial public narratives to deliver individualized, evidence-based care that addresses the holistic mental and physical wellbeing of women navigating this profound midlife transition.
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.