Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37137493›Full record

ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2023

Association between SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and healthcare contacts for menstrual disturbance and bleeding in women before and after menopause: nationwide, register based cohort study.

Rickard Ljung, YiYi Xu, Anders Sundström, Susannah Leach, Ebba Hallberg, Maria Bygdell, Maria Larsson, Veronica Arthurson, Magnus Gisslén, Rolf Gedeborg and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
8.3field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Abnormal uterine bleeding diagnoses and care following COVID-19 vaccination.American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2024
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Rickard LjungDivision of Use and Information, Swedish Medical Products Agency, Uppsala, Sweden rickard.ljung@lakemedelsverket.se.ORCID 0000-0002-0654-4530
YiYi XuSchool of Public Health and Community Medicine, Institute of Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0001-9106-0049
Anders SundströmDivision of Use and Information, Swedish Medical Products Agency, Uppsala, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0003-2337-3371
Susannah LeachDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, Institute of Biomedicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-9614-2753
Ebba HallbergDivision of Use and Information, Swedish Medical Products Agency, Uppsala, Sweden.
Maria BygdellSchool of Public Health and Community Medicine, Institute of Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-0737-8642
Maria LarssonDivision of Use and Information, Swedish Medical Products Agency, Uppsala, Sweden.
Veronica ArthursonDivision of Use and Information, Swedish Medical Products Agency, Uppsala, Sweden.
Magnus GisslénDepartment of Infectious Diseases, Institute of Biomedicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-2357-1020
Rolf GedeborgDivision of Licensing, Swedish Medical Products Agency, PO Box 26, 751 03 Uppsala, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-8850-7863
Fredrik NybergSchool of Public Health and Community Medicine, Institute of Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0003-0892-5668
Medical Products Agency · SEUniversity of Gothenburg · SESahlgrenska University Hospital · SEUppsala University · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo evaluate the risks of any menstrual disturbance and bleeding following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in women who are premenopausal or postmenopausal.

designA nationwide, register based cohort study.

settingAll inpatient and specialised outpatient care in Sweden from 27 December 2020 to 28 February 2022. A subset covering primary care for 40% of the Swedish female population was also included.

participants2 946 448 Swedish women aged 12-74 years were included. Pregnant women, women living in nursing homes, and women with history of any menstruation or bleeding disorders, breast cancer, cancer of female genital organs, or who underwent a hysterectomy between 1 January 2015 and 26 December 2020 were excluded.

interventionsSARS-CoV-2 vaccination, by vaccine product (BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, or ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222)) and dose (unvaccinated and first, second, and third dose) over two time windows (one to seven days, considered the control period, and 8-90 days).

main outcome measuresHealthcare contact (admission to hospital or visit) for menstrual disturbance or bleeding before or after menopause (diagnosed with the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision codes N91, N92, N93, N95).

results2 580 007 (87.6%) of 2 946 448 women received at least one SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and 1 652 472 (64.0%) 2 580 007 of vaccinated women received three doses before the end of follow-up. The highest risks for bleeding in women who were postmenopausal were observed after the third dose, in the one to seven days risk window (hazard ratio 1.28 (95% confidence interval 1.01 to 1.62)) and in the 8-90 days risk window (1.25 (1.04 to 1.50)). The impact of adjustment for covariates was modest. Risk of postmenopausal bleeding suggested a 23-33% increased risk after 8-90 days with BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 after the third dose, but the association with ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 was less clear. For menstrual disturbance or bleeding in women who were premenopausal, adjustment for covariates almost completely removed the weak associations noted in the crude analyses.

conclusionsWeak and inconsistent associations were observed between SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and healthcare contacts for bleeding in women who are postmenopausal, and even less evidence was recorded of an association for menstrual disturbance or bleeding in women who were premenopausal. These findings do not provide substantial support for a causal association between SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and healthcare contacts related to menstrual or bleeding disorders.

Indexed as

ChAdOx1 nCoV-19COVID-192019-nCoV Vaccine mRNA-1273BNT162 VaccineCohort StudiesCOVID-19 VaccinesFemaleHemorrhageHumansMenopauseMenstruation DisturbancesNursing HomesPregnancySARS-CoV-2Vaccination2019-nCoV Vaccine mRNA-1273BNT162 VaccineChAdOx1 nCoV-19COVID-19 Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID37137493
PMCPMC10543813
OpenAlexW4367837082

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.