Cited by 96Menstrual Health and DisordersMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and PostpartumAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Psychological intervention for premenstrual syndrome: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Busse, Jason W., Montori, Victor M., Krasnik, Catherine, Patelis-Siotis, Irene, Guyatt, Gordon H.·2009·Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics

Abstract

BACKGROUND: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the efficacy of psychological interventions for premenstrual syndrome. METHODS: We systematically searched and selected studies that enrolled women with premenstrual syndrome in which investigators randomly assigned them to a psychological intervention or to a control intervention. Trials were included irrespective of their outcomes and, when possible, we conducted meta-analyses. RESULTS: Nine randomized trials, of which 5 tested cognitive behavioural therapy, contributed data to the meta-analyses. Low quality evidence (design and implementation weaknesses of the studies, possible reporting bias) suggests that cognitive behavioural therapy significantly reduces both anxiety (effect size [ES] = -0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI] = -1.15 to -0.01; number needed to treat [NNT] = 5), and depression (ES = -0.55; 95% CI = -1.05 to -0.05; NNT = 5), and also suggests a possible beneficial effect on behavioural changes (ES = -0.70; 95% CI = -1.29 to -0.10; NNT = 4) and interference of symptoms on daily living (ES = -0.78; 95% CI = -1.53 to -0.03; NNT = 4). Results provide much more limited support for monitoring as a form of therapy and suggest the ineffectiveness of education. CONCLUSIONS: Low quality evidence from randomized trials suggests that cognitive behavioural therapy may have important beneficial effects in managing symptoms associated with premenstrual syndrome.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1159/000162296

Cites

48 of 48 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Busse, J. W., Montori, V. M., Krasnik, C., Patelis-Siotis, I., & Guyatt, G. H.
Affiliations
McMaster University (CA)
Venue
Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics
Publisher
S. Karger AG
Published
2009
Volume
78
Issue
1
Pages
6-15
ISSN
  • 0033-3190 (ISSN-L)
  • 1423-0348
OpenAlex
W2083455763
Cited by
96
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 5
FWCI
0.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Menstrual Health and Disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Maternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
premenstrual syndrome, psychological intervention, cognitive behavioral therapy, premenstrual depression, symptom monitoring, patient education, women's health
MeSH terms
Female, Humans, Premenstrual Syndrome, Psychotherapy, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic

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