Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41836736›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in sociology2026

Cycles of (in)visibility: evolvements, constancies, and frictions of menstrual cycles at work.

Samantha Schwickert, Sinje Grenzdörffer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in sociology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Samantha SchwickertInstitute for Philosophy and Social Sciences, Sociology of Technology and the Environment, Brandenburg University of Technology Cottbus-Senftenberg, Cottbus, Germany.
Sinje GrenzdörfferInstitute of Geography, Unit Economic Geography, Bern University, Bern, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Around half of all working bodies experience a menstrual cycle for a significant part of their (working) lives, followed by (peri-)menopause. Yet, the implications of cyclic embodiment and bodily transitions remain well-concealed, stigmatized, and insufficiently integrated into work organization. Theoretically positioned within critical menstruation research with focus on work organization, our study enhances existing research by offering a Methods: For this purpose, we carried out a longitudinal study (2021-2025) to explore and evaluate the effects of the menstrual cycle on the professional lives of women and people with menstrual cycles (WPMC) in Germany. Insights from qualitative interviews and action research workshops during this time period are supplemented by expert perspectives from Germany, Belgium, Ireland and Spain. Results: The results are organized alongside a differentiation between three spheres (1) individual sphere, (2) organizational sphere, (3) societal sphere. We find that growing awareness, generational shifts, and feminist practices are slowly opening spaces for cycle-sensitive and more caring work cultures, despite ongoing stigma, resistant structural barriers, and anticipated backlashes. Discussion: Our analysis shows that cyclic practices are largely individualized, which risks burdening WPMC with the additional work of finding solutions for cyclic symptoms within ongoing linear, meritocratic work structures. To counteract these dynamics, this study proposes rethinking workplaces by setting cyclic working bodies as the default. In this way, they are built to accommodate diverse and changing embodied experience by equally valuing care as well as times of regeneration.

Indexed as

critical menstruation studiesgender and organizationmenopausemenstrual cyclemenstruationmenstruation and workwork and gender

Identifiers

PMID41836736
PMCPMC12982056

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.