Cited by 196Menstrual Health and DisordersAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum

Cognitive therapy for premenstrual syndrome

Blake, Fiona, Salkovskis, Paul, Gath, Dennis, Day, Ann, Garrod, Adrienne·1998·Journal of Psychosomatic Research

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of cognitive therapy (CT) as a psychological treatment for premenstrual syndrome (PMS), by comparison with a waitlist control group. Women meeting selection criteria for PMS were randomly allocated to one of two treatment groups: (i) an immediate treatment group, who received 12 weekly sessions of individual CT; or (ii) a waiting list group who recorded symptoms of PMS for a length of time equivalent to the duration of an individual treatment in the immediate treatment group. General practitioners and gynecologists referred women who were complaining of distressing and disabling emotional and physical symptoms in the second half of the menstrual cycle, as verified by 2 months of prospective diary recording. Assessments of the women's psychological and social functioning were made on entry to the study, 2 months later, and at the end of the treatment period. This design allows evaluation of the efficacy of CT relative to any spontaneous remission that may have occurred as a consequence of the passage of time, the keeping of menstrual diaries, interview, and self-rated assessments. Results indicated that CT was significantly more effective than assignment to the waitlist group. Diary measures and self-report questionnaires indicated an almost complete remission of psychological and somatic symptoms and of impairment of functioning. It is concluded that CT for PMS is associated with substantial improvements that cannot be attributed to the passage of time or the completion of the diary and other assessments.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0022-3999(98)00042-7

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 44 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Blake, F., Salkovskis, P., Gath, D., Day, A., & Garrod, A.
Affiliations
  • John Radcliffe Hospital (GB)
  • Warneford Hospital (GB)
Corresponding author
Blake, Fiona
Venue
Journal of Psychosomatic Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1998-10
Volume
45
Issue
4
Pages
307-318
ISSN
0022-3999 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W62733424
Cited by
196
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 56 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 8
FWCI
7.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Psychosomatic Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust
  • National Institute of Mental Health
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Menstrual Health and Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Maternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
Keywords
premenstrual syndrome, cognitive therapy, psychological intervention, treatment efficacy, waitlist control, symptom remission, psychological functioning, somatic symptoms, women's health
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Humans, Premenstrual Syndrome, Surveys and Questionnaires, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review