Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Progesterone for premenstrual syndrome

Información

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD003415.pub4Copiar DOI
Base de datos:
  1. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Versión publicada:
  1. 14 marzo 2012see what's new
Tipo:
  1. Intervention
Etapa:
  1. Review
Grupo Editorial Cochrane:
  1. Grupo Cochrane de Ginecología y fertilidad

Copyright:
  1. Copyright © 2012 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Cifras del artículo

Altmetric:

Citado por:

Citado 0 veces por enlace Crossref Cited-by

Contraer

Autores

  • Olive Ford

    Correspondencia a: South Petherton, UK

    [email protected]

  • Anne Lethaby

    Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand

  • Helen Roberts

    Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand

  • Ben Willem J Mol

    Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, Netherlands

Contributions of authors

Ben Mol made suggestions during the writing of the protocol, helped with the extraction of data from the published reports of trials and contributed to the development of the methods for the first publication.

Helen Roberts was the Clinical Adviser and contributed to all sections especially in the final writing and updating.

Anne Lethaby advised during the latter part of the writing of the review particularly on the Description of Studies and Discussion and advised during updating.

Olive Ford took the lead in writing the protocol and review at all stages. She performed initial searches of databases for trials, was involved in selecting trials for inclusion, performed independent data extraction and quality assessment of the included trials, and was responsible for statistical analysis and interpretation of the data.

Declarations of interest

None known

Acknowledgements

Thanks are due to Dr Andersch, Professor Lorrainee Dennerstein, Dr E. W. Freeman, Dr P. J. Magill, Dr Andrea Rapkin, Dr S. S. Shapiro, Dr S. L. Smith and Dr Wendy Vanselow who answered questions about the methods used in their trials.

Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Berkshire, UK, Nordic Pharma UK Ltd and Wyeth Pharmaceuticals UK answered questions about progesterone products and unpublished material.

The staff of the Yeovil Central Branch of Somerset County Council Library took meticulous care in tracing obscure journals and inter‐library loans. Rose Elliot, Jill Lang, Jean Robinson and Dawn Robson deserve special thanks for this work.

Thanks are due also to Jean Hill formerly of the Academy Library, Somerset Academy‐Yeovil, Yeovil District Hospital for help with searches and copies of journal articles.

We are grateful for the support given by the staff of the Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group, especially Michelle Proctor, former Review Group Co‐ordinator,and the Search Co‐ordinators.

We thank Peter Gotzsche of the Nordic Cochrane Centre, Andy Vail, Manchester University and Sofia Dias, University of Bristol for advice on presenting data.

We acknowledge help with the assessment of the selective outcome domain in the Risk of Bias Tables, from Jamie Kirkham of the MRC funded project Outcome Reporting Bias in Trials (G0500952) investigating the degree and impact of outcome reporting bias in Cochrane reviews.

Version history

Published

Title

Stage

Authors

Version

2012 Mar 14

Progesterone for premenstrual syndrome

Review

Olive Ford, Anne Lethaby, Helen Roberts, Ben Willem J Mol

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD003415.pub4

2009 Apr 15

Progesterone for premenstrual syndrome

Review

Olive Ford, Anne Lethaby, Helen Roberts, Ben Willem J Mol

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD003415.pub3

2006 Oct 18

Progesterone for premenstrual syndrome

Review

Olive Ford, Anne Lethaby, Helen Roberts

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD003415.pub2

2006 Jul 19

Progesterone for premenstrual syndrome

Protocol

Olive Ford, Ben Mol, Helen Roberts

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD003415

Differences between protocol and review

Meta‐analysis was not possible.