↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Menstrual suppression: current perspectives

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Women's Health, June 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#29 of 898)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
9 news outlets
twitter
21 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
46 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
102 Mendeley
Title
Menstrual suppression: current perspectives
Published in
International Journal of Women's Health, June 2014
DOI 10.2147/ijwh.s46680
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paula Adams Hillard

Abstract

Menstrual suppression to provide relief of menstrual-related symptoms or to manage medical conditions associated with menstrual morbidity or menstrual exacerbation has been used clinically since the development of steroid hormonal therapies. Options range from the extended or continuous use of combined hormonal oral contraceptives, to the use of combined hormonal patches and rings, progestins given in a variety of formulations from intramuscular injection to oral therapies to intrauterine devices, and other agents such as gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists. The agents used for menstrual suppression have variable rates of success in inducing amenorrhea, but typically have increasing rates of amenorrhea over time. Therapy may be limited by side effects, most commonly irregular, unscheduled bleeding. These therapies can benefit women's quality of life, and by stabilizing the hormonal milieu, potentially improve the course of underlying medical conditions such as diabetes or a seizure disorder. This review addresses situations in which menstrual suppression may be of benefit, and lists options which have been successful in inducing medical amenorrhea.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 102 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 102 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 18 18%
Student > Master 12 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 8%
Researcher 7 7%
Student > Postgraduate 6 6%
Other 20 20%
Unknown 31 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 35 34%
Social Sciences 6 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Other 12 12%
Unknown 37 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 94. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 January 2024.
All research outputs
#463,362
of 25,824,818 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Women's Health
#29
of 898 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,930
of 241,848 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Women's Health
#2
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,824,818 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 898 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 241,848 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.