SynthesisFrontiers in endocrinology2026
Clinical and endocrine effects of pharmacological therapy in endometriosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Glycolytic Reprogramming in Endometriosis: Biological Basis and Emerging Targets for Disease-Modifying Therapy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Comparative effectiveness of hormonal therapies for preventing recurrence in endometriosis: a real-world retrospective cohort study with risk factor analysis.BMC women's health · 2026Article
- Antioxidant dietary patterns mitigate pain and raise psychological wellbeing in ovarian endometrioma: surgical status shapes associations.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Endometriosis, PCOS, adenomyosis, and dysmenorrhea are major illnesses. Hormonal as well as non-hormonal treatments were evaluated for COCs, progestins, GnRH analogues, LNG-IUS, relugolix, and adjunctive therapies. These treatments resulted in the categorization of the benefits in varying degrees. Methods: 149 clinical trials have been included. Evaluating the methodological quality was done through the Jadad scale, while the GRADE criteria were used to assess the reliability of the evidence. When these data were available, effect sizes, standardized mean differences (SMD), 95% confidence intervals (CI), and p-values were extracted. Results: It was observed that COCs and progestins considerably lowered pelvic pain and menstrual irregularities (SMD -0.35 to -0.58, 95% CI -0.90 to -0.08, p<0.05), and among various trials, dienogest was reported to be the most effective in alleviating dysmenorrhea (SMD -0.58, 95% CI -0.90 to -0.26, p<0.001). The use of relugolix in combination resulted in considerable pain reduction related to endometriosis (SMD -0.72, 95% CI -0.94 to -0.50, p<0.001), and the study was rated as excellent quality with GRADE and Jadad scores of 5. GnRH analogs led to pain reduction all the time (SMD -0.65, 95% CI -0.88 to -0.42, p<0.001), while the application of LNG-IUS was linked to less menorrhagia and lower recurrence after surgery (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.33-0.79, p=0.002). Besides the main treatments, usage of the like of antioxidants, NAC, melatonin, and digital therapeutics, too, gave extra pain relief and quality-of-life benefits (SMD -0.40 to -0.62, p<0.05). the studies frequently proved to have a very rigorous quality of methodology (Jadad 3-5) and moderate-to-high grade certainty of evidence (GRADE). Conclusions: Endometriosis disorder have been treated well with hormonal therapies. Different endocrine therapies based on the patient's specific characteristics and the degree of tolerability should be used to achieve the maximum effect of clinical outcomes.
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.