ArticleVaccine2024
Association between Covishield vaccine and menstrual disturbance. Findings from a cross-sectional study among participants of Zero TB cohort in India.
Article in Vaccine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe association between covid-19 vaccine and menstrual disturbance is unclear.
methodsAn in-person cross-sectional survey among female members ≥ 18 years enrolled in an ongoing Zero TB prospective cohort in Northern India who had received one or two doses of covid-19 vaccine was conducted to study the characteristics and association of menstrual disturbance within six months of receiving Covishield.
resultsBetween June 29 and September 5, 2021, 339 females ≥ 18 years of age were administered the survey. Median age was 30 (IQR: 22-39) years; 84 % were between 18 and 49 and 16 % were ≥ 50 years old. There were 152 college students, 27 healthcare workers, and 160 nuns. Forty-two women (12 %) had received one dose and 297 (88 %) had received two doses of Covishield. Overall, 66 (20 %) women reported experiencing menstrual disturbance after receiving Covishield vaccine. The problems included early menstruation: 6 % (n = 19/339); late menstruation: 4 % (n = 14/339); and heavier bleeding: 5 % (n = 17/339). Disturbances lasted for less than seven days and cycles normalized in 1-3 months. There was no post-menopausal bleeding. There was no significant difference in menstrual disturbance based on receiving one vs. two doses of Covishield (OR: 1.58; 95 % CI: 0.55-4.57; p = 0.381). History of SARS-CoV-2 infection was not associated with the development of menstrual disturbance among the vaccinees (OR: 0.63; 95 % CI: 0.24-1.73; p = 0.379). Presence of emotional disturbance at baseline (OR: 31; 95 % CI: 3.52-267; p = 0.002) or previous history of dysmenorrhea (OR: 41; 95 % CI: 8.7-196; p < 0.001) was associated with menstrual disturbance in the vaccinees, indicating their potential to confound or bias study results.
conclusionMenstrual problems were reported by Covishield vaccinees, but they were minor and reversible within three months and do not constitute a ground for vaccine hesitancy. Studies designed to assess causal link taking care to avoid selection bias or confounding are needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.