| Title |
Progestogens with or without oestrogen for irregular uterine bleeding associated with anovulation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd001895.pub3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Martha Hickey, Jenny M Higham, Ian Fraser |
| Abstract |
Irregular menstrual bleeding may arise due to exogenous sex steroids, lesions of the genital tract or be associated with anovulation. Irregular bleeding due to oligo/anovulation (previously called dysfunctional uterine bleeding or DUB) is more common at the extremes of reproductive life, and in women with ovulatory disorders such as polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). In anovulatory cycles there may be prolonged oestrogen stimulation of the endometrium without progesterone withdrawal and so cycles are irregular and bleeding may be heavy. This is the rationale for using cyclical progestogens during the second half of the menstrual cycle, in order to provoke a regular withdrawal bleed. Continuous progestogen is intended to induce endometrial atrophy and hence to prevent oestrogen-stimulated endometrial proliferation. Progestogens, and oestrogens and progestogens in combination, are widely used in the management of irregular menstrual bleeding, but the regime, dose and type of progestogen used vary widely, with little consensus about the optimum treatment approach. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 50% |
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 112 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Ukraine | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 111 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 9 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 7% |
| Other | 20 | 18% |
| Unknown | 37 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 42 | 38% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 11% |
| Psychology | 7 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 3% |
| Unknown | 40 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 October 2022.
All research outputs
#4,886,384
of 23,506,079 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,379
of 12,725 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,435
of 169,724 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#133
of 234 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,506,079 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,725 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.0. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 169,724 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 234 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.