Cited by 77Menstrual Health and DisordersGender and Feminist StudiesGender, Health, and Social Inequality

The role of premenstrual dysphoric disorder in the subjectification of women

Ussher, Jane M.·2003·Journal of Medical Humanities

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1023/a:1021366001305

Cites

53 of 53 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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

4 of the 57 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ussher, J. M.
Affiliations
Western Sydney University (AU)
Corresponding author
Ussher, Jane M.
Venue
Journal of Medical Humanities
Published
2003-06
Volume
24
Issue
1-2
Pages
131-146
ISSN
  • 0882-6498 (ISSN-L)
  • 1041-3545
  • 1573-3645
OpenAlex
W1603221205
Cited by
77
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 4
FWCI
3.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Medical Humanities (publishedVersion)
  • DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Menstrual Health and Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender and Feminist Studies
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Gender, Health, and Social Inequality
Keywords
premenstrual dysphoric disorder, premenstrual syndrome, subjectification, objectification of women, medicalization, femininity, reproductive body, assemblage, women's health

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