CHAMGAP
APPROVEDReviewed and approved by the Chamgap Editorial Team (2026-07-24). The draft was written by AI, the existence of all 2 cited sources was verified at the original page, and the verdict passed blind grading and adversarial audit. Methodology v0.6.
Verdict No. 1843 · Search date 2026-07-24 · Methodology v0.6

Combined oral contraceptive,
does it really help with Relief of primary dysmenorrhea?

30-Second Summary
B
Evidence Grade B · 72 · Safety caution
Combined oral contraceptives moderately reduce primary dysmenorrhea, but contraceptive needs and thrombotic contraindications matter
Irregular bleeding, nausea, and headache are common, and estrogen-containing products rarely increase venous thromboembolism risk. Smoking, migraine with aura, thrombotic history, and other contraindications require review before prescribing.
What the
research shows
Combined oral contraceptives are rated B because multiple randomized trials show a moderate reduction in primary dysmenorrhea versus placebo. Six placebo-controlled trials with 588 participants produced an SMD of -0.58 (95% CI -0.74 to -0.41), equivalent to about 0.7 to 1.3 points on a 0-to-6 total score.
What the
ads claim
Established contraceptive efficacy does not automatically prove dysmenorrhea efficacy. This grade uses only trials that directly measured menstrual pain.
*

Useful facts when choosing a product

  • Harada 2021 distinguished 251 randomized from 245 in the main analysis.
  • Contraceptive evidence from verdict 932 was not transferred.
Gap Measurement · Verdict 1843 · B 72
What advertising claims
What independent, higher-quality research supports
△ GAP
01

What the research actually shows

Harada 2021 enrolled both primary and secondary dysmenorrhea, randomized 251, and analyzed 245; total dysmenorrhea score changed by -1.8 with cyclic treatment, -3.1 with extended treatment, and -0.9 with placebo, with both active regimens at P<0.01, so the primary endpoint succeeded. Its mixed population is indirect for a primary-only claim. Cochrane 2023 reviewed 21 trials and 3,723 participants; six placebo-controlled pain trials in primary dysmenorrhea with 588 participants yielded SMD -0.58, 95% CI -0.74 to -0.41, I-squared 28%. Manufacturers funded 11 studies, but government-funded work was also present, giving I1. verdict 932, which is A with 80 points, concerns contraception in the same drug class, and that evidence was not transferred. In the same indication, verdict 1034, which is B with 70 points, and verdict 857, which is B with 75 points, concern mefenamic acid and ibuprofen; verdict 453, which is C with 57 points, and verdict 575, which is C with 48 points, concern ginger and fennel.

02

Why this is classified as B (72)

P, R2, I1, E+, and B0 derive B with 72 points.

Counterpoint. Contraceptive needs, bleeding preference, contraindications, and personal preference matter alongside pain relief.

Rejudgment record. Cross-check applied — Multiple placebo-controlled trials including independent work reproduced moderate relief of primary dysmenorrhea pain

Scoring profile behind this grade
EndpointPPatient-reported treatment goal - the symptom is the goal
ReplicationR2Independently replicated across trials
IndependenceI1Mixed funding sources
Effect sizeE+Meets the clinically important threshold

The scoring table and the verdict agree (B).

Sub-claim grades by effect

This ingredient is marketed for several effects. A single overall grade blends strong and weak claims together, so each effect is graded separately here. The overall grade reflects the strongest disconfirming or core claim.

Effect (sub-claim)GradeBasis
Reduction in primary dysmenorrhea pain score after treatmentBSix trials reproduced a moderate effect.
Increase in pain-improvement respondersBSix trials with 717 participants produced RR 1.65.
Reduction in dysmenorrhea-related absenceCEvidence is low certainty from two trials and 148 participants.

Cross-check — Codex and Claude

This verdict was drafted by Codex through literature review and source-existence checks, cross-checked through blind grading and adversarial audit, and settled by reapplying the methodology boundary rules. Cases with split grades were resolved through rejudgment.
03

Evidence Table

StudyDesignSampleFundingEndpointResultWeight
Harada T, Momoeda M. 2021Randomized double-blind three-arm placebo-controlled trial in a mixed primary and secondary dysmenorrhea population245Manufacturer sponsorship from Nobelpharma Co., Ltd.Change in total dysmenorrhea scoreCyclic -1.8, extended -3.1, placebo -0.9; both active regimens P<0.01, primary endpoint succeededContemporary direct randomized trial with mixed-population indirectness for a primary-only claim
Schroll JB et al. 2023Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis588Academic Cochrane review; 11 manufacturer-funded trials plus government-funded workPost-treatment pain score and pain improvementSMD -0.58 (95% CI -0.74 to -0.41), I-squared 28%; primary efficacy conclusion positiveKey replicated synthesis
§

Receipt — 2 References

All 2 cited sources were verified for existence at the original page (as of 2026-07-24).

Harada T, Momoeda M. Efficacy of cyclic and extended regimens of ethinylestradiol 0.02 mg-levonorgestrel 0.09 mg for dysmenorrhea: a placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized trial. Reprod Med Biol. 2021;20(2):215-223. DOI: 10.1002/rmb2.12373.
checked
Schroll JB, Black AY, Farquhar C, Chen I. Combined oral contraceptive pill for primary dysmenorrhoea. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023;2023(7):CD002120. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002120.pub4.
checked
Draft and rewrite: Codex (AI) · Verification: Codex blind grading and adversarial audit · Final adjudication: Claude
Reviewed and approved: Chamgap Editorial Team · Approval date: 2026-07-24 · Corrections: none

Cite this verdict

Combined oral contraceptive x relief of primary dysmenorrhea Evidence Grade B card
[Chamgap] Combined oral contraceptive x relief of primary dysmenorrhea — Evidence Grade B·72. 2 cited sources checked. Source: https://chamgap.com/en/verdicts/womens/combined-oral-contraceptive-primary-dysmenorrhea-pain/ · CC BY 4.0

CC BY 4.0 — free to use with attribution; do not distort grades, numbers, or verdict meaning.

!

What this document does and does not do

Chamgap is an information source. It reports what research has and has not confirmed; it does not tell readers what to take or buy. That decision belongs to readers and, when needed, medical or legal professionals. This verdict reflects literature available up to the search date and may change as new research appears. Nothing here is medical advice.