ArticlePLOS mental health2025
Identifying predictors of formal help-seeking for premenstrual symptoms: A machine learning analysis of symptom, functional impairment and barriers data.
Article in PLOS mental health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite the potential severity and burden of premenstrual symptoms, few appear to seek formal care. Given that access to many therapeutic interventions requires formal help-seeking, it is important to understand predictors of this health behaviour. This study employed machine learning to identify symptoms, functional impairment, and barriers to accessing care that predict formal help-seeking for premenstrual symptoms. Data was collected from a UK-based sample using online survey software and explored using descriptive analysis. Group differences in ordinal and categorical data between those who have and have not sought formal help specifically for premenstrual symptoms were examined using Mann-Whitney U tests and Chi-square tests, respectively. Predictive models of help-seeking were built using the decision tree-based machine learning method, Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost). A total of 592 participants with complete data who endorsed premenstrual symptoms in consecutive cycles were included for analysis. Of those, 57.26% (n = 339) had previously seen a healthcare professional specifically for premenstrual symptoms. The model predicting formal help-seeking demonstrated fair performance, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.75 (SD = 0.06), a sensitivity of 0.65 (SD = 0.10), and a specificity of 0.71 (SD = 0.11). The strongest predictors of formal help-seeking were impaired social functioning, thinking that symptoms were severe, impairment in work/studies, and a previous poor care experience for gynaecological/reproductive conditions. These insights may be leveraged to encourage help-seeking behaviour, potentially reducing unnecessary distress or impairment. Improved knowledge of premenstrual symptoms and disorders is vital to facilitate identification of severe symptoms and impaired functioning related to the menstrual cycle. Additionally, improved guidance on when to seek help is required to increase the rate of formal help-seeking, particularly for individuals with high-risk psychological symptoms such as suicidality. More work is needed to determine the specific mechanism by which previous poor care experiences drive further help-seeking for premenstrual symptoms.
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.