Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34545843›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in endocrinology, diabetes, and obesity2021

Menstrual cycle length and modern living: a review.

Lily R Campbell, Ariel L Scalise, Brett T DiBenedictis, Shruthi Mahalingaiah

Abstract readReviewVideo-Audio Media
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in endocrinology, diabetes, and obesity, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. The menstrual cycle is a vital sign across the lifespan.The Lancet. Obstetrics, gynaecology, & women's health · 2025
    Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Seasonal variations of menstrual cycle length in a large, US-based, digital cohort.International journal of hygiene and environmental health · 2024
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Lily R CampbellDepartment of Biology, Boston University.
Ariel L ScaliseHarvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts.
Brett T DiBenedictisDepartment of Psychology, Sacred Heart University, Fairfield, Connecticut, USA.
Shruthi MahalingaiahDepartment of Environmental Health, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewThe aim of this review is to evaluate biological, life history, environmental, and lifestyle factors and exposures that cause variability in menstrual cycle length (MCL). RECENT

findingsRecent literature has detailed a number of factors that influence MCL, with particular emphasis placed on novel environmental exposures, such as air pollution and endocrine disrupting chemicals. SUMMARY: MCL varies widely in response to intrinsic and extrinsic inputs and is a useful predictor of reproductive health and fecundability. VIDEO ABSTRACT: http://links.lww.com/COE/A28.

Indexed as

Endocrine DisruptorsMenstrual CycleEnvironmental ExposureFemaleFertilityHumansEndocrine Disruptors

Identifiers

PMID34545843
PMCPMC8631146

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.