A Cochrane review [Abstract] 1 included 2 trials with a total of 280 women. Of these 115 yielded analysable results. It was impossible to combine data in a meta-analysis because the studies differed in design, participants, doses and administration of progesterone, and in outcome measures. Both trials had defects. They intended to exclude women whose symptoms continued after their periods. When data from ineligible women were excluded from analysis in one trial, the other women were found to have benefited more from progesterone than placebo. The smaller study found no statistically significant difference between oral progesterone, vaginally absorbed progesterone and placebo, but reported outcomes incompletely.
Comment: The quality of evidence is downgraded by serious limitations in study quality and by sparse data.
Primary/Secondary Keywords