J Taffe1, L Dennerstein. 1. Office for Gender and Health, Department of Psychiatry, University of Melbourne, Parkville 3010, Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the reliability of self-report of menstrual frequency and flow changes in the context of determining menopausal status categories, using data from the longitudinal phase of the Melbourne Women's Midlife Health Project (MWMHP). METHODS: Women reporting at interview at least one menstrual period during the previous 3 months are assigned pre- or perimenopausal status according to their responses to questions about changes in menstrual frequency and flow. For a sample of 72 such women, menstrual diary information was converted into standardized scores measuring change in frequency and flow of menses during the 2 years prior to interview. These scores, coded into categories, were used to derive measures of the sensitivity, specificity and predictive values of the interview responses. RESULTS: Self-report of change in menstrual frequency and flow have low sensitivity to measures based on prospectively kept menstrual diaries. CONCLUSIONS: Retrospective self-report at interview of changes in menstrual frequency and flow should not be regarded as reliable measures of actual changes in cycle parameters.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the reliability of self-report of menstrual frequency and flow changes in the context of determining menopausal status categories, using data from the longitudinal phase of the Melbourne Women's Midlife Health Project (MWMHP). METHODS:Women reporting at interview at least one menstrual period during the previous 3 months are assigned pre- or perimenopausal status according to their responses to questions about changes in menstrual frequency and flow. For a sample of 72 such women, menstrual diary information was converted into standardized scores measuring change in frequency and flow of menses during the 2 years prior to interview. These scores, coded into categories, were used to derive measures of the sensitivity, specificity and predictive values of the interview responses. RESULTS: Self-report of change in menstrual frequency and flow have low sensitivity to measures based on prospectively kept menstrual diaries. CONCLUSIONS: Retrospective self-report at interview of changes in menstrual frequency and flow should not be regarded as reliable measures of actual changes in cycle parameters.
Authors: Siobán D Harlow; Kevin Cain; Sybil Crawford; Lorraine Dennerstein; Roderick Little; Ellen S Mitchell; Bin Nan; John F Randolph; John Taffe; Matheos Yosef Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2006-06-13 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: James R Slauterbeck; Stephen F Fuzie; Michael P Smith; Russell J Clark; K Xu; David W Starch; Daniel M Hardy Journal: J Athl Train Date: 2002-09 Impact factor: 2.860
Authors: Pangaja Paramsothy; Siobán D Harlow; Michael R Elliott; Lynda D Lisabeth; Sybil L Crawford; John F Randolph Journal: Menopause Date: 2013-07 Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Anne Marie Zaura Jukic; Clarice R Weinberg; Allen J Wilcox; D Robert McConnaughey; Paige Hornsby; Donna D Baird Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2007-10-10 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: P Paramsothy; S D Harlow; G A Greendale; E B Gold; S L Crawford; M R Elliott; L D Lisabeth; J F Randolph Journal: BJOG Date: 2014-04-16 Impact factor: 6.531
Authors: Siobán D Harlow; Ellen S Mitchell; Sybil Crawford; Bin Nan; Roderick Little; John Taffe Journal: Fertil Steril Date: 2007-08-06 Impact factor: 7.329