Assessment of menstrual regularity and irregularity using self-reports and objective criteria
- 1 January 1998
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Taylor & Francis in Journal of Psychosomatic Obstetrics & Gynecology
- Vol. 19 (2) , 111-116
- https://doi.org/10.3109/01674829809048504
Abstract
To assess subjective and objective definitions of menstrual regularity, and the relationship between them, 114 university students (mean age 20.3 years) prospectively recorded eight consecutive menstrual dates and reported whether they considered themselves ‘regular’ or ‘irregular’. The percentage of women who reported being menstrually ‘regular’ or menstrually ‘irregular’ was compared with a classification developed according to a criterion based upon the results of their prospective menstrual records. According to self-reports and objective measures of regularity, a similar portion of the women (about 70%) were regular. But when cross-classifying regularity and non-regularity by the two procedures, it was found that only 44% of those who defined themselves as irregular were likewise defined by the objective criteria, whereas 82% of the women who defined themselves as regular were also deemed so by the objective criteria. It is concluded that some women will, and others will not, construe ‘variability’ as ‘irregularity’Keywords
This publication has 16 references indexed in Scilit:
- Menstrual synchrony between mothers and daughters and between roommatesPhysiology & Behavior, 1993
- Length and variation in the menstrual cycle—a cross‐sectional study from a Danish countyBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1992
- Analysis of menstrual records of women immunized with anti-hcg vaccines inducing antibodies partially cross-reactive with hLHContraception, 1990
- Pregnanediol excretion in fertile women: age-related changesJournal of Endocrinology, 1988
- An examination of the variation in timed endometrial biopsiesHuman Reproduction, 1988
- Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes.Psychological Review, 1977
- Variations in menstrual cycle symptom reportingJournal of Psychosomatic Research, 1976
- A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE PREMENSTRUAL SYNDROMEThe Lancet, 1965
- PREDICTING LENGTH OF MENSTRUAL CYCLEThe Lancet, 1965
- ADDITIONAL LIGHT ON THE DYSMENORRHEA PROBLEMJAMA, 1930