Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 287

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

von Willebrand disease in women with menorrhagia: a systematic review

Shankar, Meena, Lee, Christine A., Sabin, Caroline A., Economides, Demetrios L., Kadir, Rezan A.·2004·BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology

Abstract

Objective To determine the prevalence of von Willebrand disease in women presenting with menorrhagia. Design Systematic review of studies evaluating the prevalence of von Willebrand disease in women with menorrhagia. Setting Hospital outpatient clinics (mainly gynaecological) and population surveys. Population Women presenting with menorrhagia. Methods Relevant studies were extracted from MEDLINE search, bibliographies of identified articles and published proceedings of meetings and conferences. Main outcome measures Number of women with von Willebrand disease. Results Eleven studies were included, totalling 988 women with menorrhagia. One hundred and thirty‐one women were diagnosed to have von Willebrand disease with prevalences in individual studies ranging from 5% to 24%. The overall prevalence was 13% (95% CI 11–15.6%). The prevalence was higher in the European studies—18% (95% CI 15–23%) compared with that in North American studies—10% (95% CI 7.5–13%). This difference (P= 0.007) is likely to be the result of differences in the studies, which include method of recruitment of study population, method of assessing menstrual blood loss ethnic composition of study population, criteria for diagnosis and use of race‐ and ABO blood group‐specific values for von Willebrand factor. Conclusions The prevalence of von Willebrand disease is increased in women with menorrhagia and is the underlying cause in a small but significant group of women with menorrhagia across the world. Testing for this disorder should be considered when investigating women with menorrhagia, especially those of Caucasian origin, those with no obvious pelvic pathology or with additional bleeding symptoms.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2004.00176.x

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 287

Metadata

Authors
Shankar, M., Lee, C. A., Sabin, C. A., Economides, D. L., & Kadir, R. A.
Venue
BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2004-04-26
Volume
111
Issue
7
Pages
734-740
ISSN
  • 0306-5456 (ISSN-L)
  • 1470-0328
  • 1471-0528
OpenAlex
W2028949333
Cited by
287
References
1
FWCI
0.98
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: von Willebrand disease in women with menorrhagia: a systematic review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2004.00176.x
The paper
Shankar, M., Lee, C. A., Sabin, C. A., Economides, D. L., & Kadir, R. A. (2004). von Willebrand disease in women with menorrhagia: a systematic review. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2004.00176.x

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.