Biological rhythms in premenstrual syndrome and premenstrual dysphoric disorder: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Women with premenstrual syndrome (PMS) and premenstrual dysphoric disorder (PMDD) typically experience a range of psychological and physiological symptoms that negatively affect their quality of life. Disruption in biological rhythms, including alterations of the sleep-wake cycle, have been implicated in PMS/PMDD, though literature is still growing to substantiate these findings. The objective of this study is to systematically review the available literature on biological rhythms disruption in PMS/PMDD. METHODS: A literature search was conducted on four databases (Pubmed, Embase, Medline, and Web of Science) on December 3rd, 2021. This search yielded a total of 575 articles that assessed the relationship between biological rhythms and PMS/PMDD/premenstrual symptoms. RESULTS: After the exclusion of irrelevant articles and hand-searching references, 25 articles were included in this systematic review. Some studies showed that women with PMS/PMDD present lower melatonin levels, elevated nighttime core body temperature, and worse subjective perception of sleep quality when compared to women without PMS/PMDD. Other biological rhythms parameters showed either no differences between groups (wrist actimetry) or conflicting results (objective sleep parameters, cortisol, prolactin, and thyroid stimulating hormone). CONCLUSION: Current research demonstrates that women with PMS/PMDD experience lower melatonin levels, higher body temperature, and worse subjective perception of sleep quality. This review outlines some possible mechanisms behind these findings and proposes recommendations for future research. This systematic review was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) under registration number CRD42020149921.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".