Cargando…
A review of menopause nomenclature
Menopause nomenclature varies in the scholarly literature making synthesis and interpretation of research findings difficult. Therefore, the present study aimed to review and discuss critical developments in menopause nomenclature; determine the level of heterogeneity amongst menopause definitions a...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8805414/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35101087 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12978-022-01336-7 |
_version_ | 1784643246481211392 |
---|---|
author | Ambikairajah, Ananthan Walsh, Erin Cherbuin, Nicolas |
author_facet | Ambikairajah, Ananthan Walsh, Erin Cherbuin, Nicolas |
author_sort | Ambikairajah, Ananthan |
collection | PubMed |
description | Menopause nomenclature varies in the scholarly literature making synthesis and interpretation of research findings difficult. Therefore, the present study aimed to review and discuss critical developments in menopause nomenclature; determine the level of heterogeneity amongst menopause definitions and compare them with the Stages of Reproductive Aging Workshop criteria. Definitions/criteria used to characterise premenopausal and postmenopausal status were extracted from 210 studies and 128 of these studies were included in the final analyses. The main findings were that 39.84% of included studies were consistent with STRAW classification of premenopause, whereas 70.31% were consistent with STRAW classification of postmenopause. Surprisingly, major inconsistencies relating to premenopause definition were due to a total lack of reporting of any definitions/criteria for premenopause (39.84% of studies). In contrast, only 20.31% did not report definitions/criteria for postmenopause. The present findings indicate that there is a significant amount of heterogeneity associated with the definition of premenopause, compared with postmenopause. We propose three key suggestions/recommendations, which can be distilled from these findings. Firstly, premenopause should be transparently operationalised and reported. Secondly, as a minimum requirement, regular menstruation should be defined as the number of menstrual cycles in a period of at least 3 months. Finally, the utility of introducing normative age-ranges as supplementary criterion for defining stages of reproductive ageing should be considered. The use of consistent terminology in research will enhance our capacity to compare results from different studies and more effectively investigate issues related to women’s health and ageing. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12978-022-01336-7. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8805414 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-88054142022-02-03 A review of menopause nomenclature Ambikairajah, Ananthan Walsh, Erin Cherbuin, Nicolas Reprod Health Review Menopause nomenclature varies in the scholarly literature making synthesis and interpretation of research findings difficult. Therefore, the present study aimed to review and discuss critical developments in menopause nomenclature; determine the level of heterogeneity amongst menopause definitions and compare them with the Stages of Reproductive Aging Workshop criteria. Definitions/criteria used to characterise premenopausal and postmenopausal status were extracted from 210 studies and 128 of these studies were included in the final analyses. The main findings were that 39.84% of included studies were consistent with STRAW classification of premenopause, whereas 70.31% were consistent with STRAW classification of postmenopause. Surprisingly, major inconsistencies relating to premenopause definition were due to a total lack of reporting of any definitions/criteria for premenopause (39.84% of studies). In contrast, only 20.31% did not report definitions/criteria for postmenopause. The present findings indicate that there is a significant amount of heterogeneity associated with the definition of premenopause, compared with postmenopause. We propose three key suggestions/recommendations, which can be distilled from these findings. Firstly, premenopause should be transparently operationalised and reported. Secondly, as a minimum requirement, regular menstruation should be defined as the number of menstrual cycles in a period of at least 3 months. Finally, the utility of introducing normative age-ranges as supplementary criterion for defining stages of reproductive ageing should be considered. The use of consistent terminology in research will enhance our capacity to compare results from different studies and more effectively investigate issues related to women’s health and ageing. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12978-022-01336-7. BioMed Central 2022-01-31 /pmc/articles/PMC8805414/ /pubmed/35101087 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12978-022-01336-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Review Ambikairajah, Ananthan Walsh, Erin Cherbuin, Nicolas A review of menopause nomenclature |
title | A review of menopause nomenclature |
title_full | A review of menopause nomenclature |
title_fullStr | A review of menopause nomenclature |
title_full_unstemmed | A review of menopause nomenclature |
title_short | A review of menopause nomenclature |
title_sort | review of menopause nomenclature |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8805414/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35101087 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12978-022-01336-7 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ambikairajahananthan areviewofmenopausenomenclature AT walsherin areviewofmenopausenomenclature AT cherbuinnicolas areviewofmenopausenomenclature AT ambikairajahananthan reviewofmenopausenomenclature AT walsherin reviewofmenopausenomenclature AT cherbuinnicolas reviewofmenopausenomenclature |