The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Prevalence and Risk Factors of Dysmenorrhea
Abstract
Dysmenorrhea is a common menstrual complaint with a major impact on women's quality of life, work productivity, and health-care utilization. A comprehensive review was performed on longitudinal or case-control or cross-sectional studies with large community-based samples to accurately determine the prevalence and/or incidence and risk factors of dysmenorrhea. Fifteen primary studies, published between 2002 and 2011, met the inclusion criteria. The prevalence of dysmenorrhea varies between 16% and 91% in women of reproductive age, with severe pain in 2%-29% of the women studied. Women's age, parity, and use of oral contraceptives were inversely associated with dysmenorrhea, and high stress increased the risk of dysmenorrhea. The effect sizes were generally modest to moderate, with odds ratios varying between 1 and 4. Family history of dysmenorrhea strongly increased its risk, with odds ratios between 3.8 and 20.7. Inconclusive evidence was found for modifiable factors such as cigarette smoking, diet, obesity, depression, and abuse. Dysmenorrhea is a significant symptom for a large proportion of women of reproductive age; however, severe pain limiting daily activities is less common. This review confirms that dysmenorrhea improves with increased age, parity, and use of oral contraceptives and is positively associated with stress and family history of dysmenorrhea.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Epidemiology of menstrual disorders in developing countries: a systematic review
Harlow, S. D., & Campbell, O. M. R. (2004) · BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology · doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2004.00012.x · Cited by 291
Cigarette smoking, menstrual symptoms and miscarriage among young women
MISHRA, G. D., DOBSON, A. J., & SCHOFIELD, M. J. (2000) · Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health · doi:10.1111/j.1467-842x.2000.tb01604.x · Cited by 102
Self-citation
Cited by
Primary Dysmenorrhea: Pathophysiology, Diagnosis, and Treatment Updates
Itani, R., Soubra, L., Karout, S., Rahme, D., Karout, L., & Khojah, H. M. J. (2022) · Korean Journal of Family Medicine · doi:10.4082/kjfm.21.0103 · Cited by 280
Hugon-Rodin, J., Lebègue, G., Becourt, S., Hamonet, C., & Gompel, A. (2016) · Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases · doi:10.1186/s13023-016-0511-2 · Cited by 78
Tomás-Rodríguez, M. I., Palazón-Bru, A., Martínez-St John, D. R. J., Navarro-Cremades, F., Toledo-Marhuenda, J. V., & Gil-Guillén, V. F. (2017) · Journal of Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology · doi:10.1016/j.jpag.2016.09.007 · Cited by 47
Yoshino, O., Takahashi, N., & Suzukamo, Y. (2022) · Advances in Therapy · doi:10.1007/s12325-022-02118-0 · Cited by 34
“Dysmenorrhea is the most common gynecological condition worldwide, affecting up to 90% of women during their reproductive years [1].”
BackgroundCasanova, E., Sharp, J., Edelson, S., Kelly, D., & Casanova, M. (2018) · Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.3390/bs8030035 · Cited by 18
Metadata
- Authors
- Ju, H., Jones, M., & Mishra, G.
- Venue
- Epidemiologic Reviews
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2013-11-26
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 104-113
- ISSN
- 0193-936X (ISSN-L)
- 1478-6729
- OpenAlex
- W2136737524
- Cited by
- 835
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 21.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Prevalence and Risk Factors of Dysmenorrhea. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/epirev/mxt009
- The paper
- Ju, H., Jones, M., & Mishra, G. (2014). The Prevalence and Risk Factors of Dysmenorrhea. Epidemiologic Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1093/epirev/mxt009
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.