Tidlignok Insight · Knowledge questions

What do we really know?

There are questions about girls' and women's health that deserve better answers. Some have been extensively researched. Others lack good Norwegian figures, have uncertain findings or require better comparisons. We make these questions visible and examine the available evidence.

What have we learned?Suggest a question

A question without a clear answer is not necessarily a research gap.

We begin by examining what research has already shown. Then we distinguish between a lack of research, a lack of Norwegian statistics, uncertain results and existing knowledge that is difficult to compare. The cards below draw on identified Norwegian and international research and show specific questions that still need investigation, not claims that research is absent. We link these questions to specific sources as they are verified.

Explore the questions

We begin with what Norwegian and international research already documents. Then we show what the findings cannot answer and which questions still require better investigation. “Partially addressed” means that relevant sources exist, not that the question has been fully answered.

Search for a questionChoose topic

Knowledge status

6 questions shown

Menstruation and school

Who experiences menstruation-related school absence, and which measures reduce it?

Partially addressed

Published sources address parts of the question, but not the whole question or the entire target population.

If pain makes it difficult to attend classes, schools need knowledge to provide appropriate support.

What is the status, and when was it assessed?

The Norwegian MINA study and an international meta-analysis document menstruation-related school absence. Differences in definitions and measurement methods limit comparison and generalisability.

Editorially reviewed: 2026-11-03.

The knowledge status is updated only after a documented review of the evidence.

Change history

2026-11-03 · First documented review

Six knowledge questions were linked to relevant published reviews and some registered research projects. None of the questions has been declared definitively answered.

2026-11-03 · Norwegian and global research added for all six questions

The review identified systematic reviews and Norwegian and international studies covering all six topics. The questions were refined from general gaps in knowledge to specific uncertainties about groups, methods, generalisability and documented intervention effects.

What do we know, and what still needs investigation?

What do we know?

Norwegian MINA data show that 255 of 300 pupils with severe pain reported menstruation-related absence. A meta-analysis of 54 studies with 41,112 participants found a pooled estimate of 26.5%, but with very substantial variation between studies. The measures of absence are not identical.

What do we still need to find out?

We need more comparable evidence on how often and for how long pupils are absent, differences between groups and the effects of school-based and healthcare interventions.

How do we investigate this?

Distinguish self-reported absence from recorded days of absence, and compare measurement methods, age, country and intervention effects.

Published research relevant to this question

MINA: Menstrual pain and school absence among adolescents
A Norwegian study directly examining self-reported absence among pupils in Oslo; not nationally representative.
Global meta-analysis of menstruation-related school absence (54 studies)
41,112 participants; substantial variation between studies and no direct national estimate for Norway.

This is a selection of Norwegian and international original publications and reviews, not an exhaustive literature review. An indirectly relevant study does not necessarily answer the question.

Ongoing research

These are examples from registered research projects. They are not completed findings, and their status may change. Always check the original registration.

No specific ongoing study has yet been selected for this question.

No named ongoing study has yet been verified as directly answering this question. Explore the registry and verify the purpose, status and target population.

Explore ongoing research and original registrations

The question and relevant sources were last reviewed on 3 November 2026.

Relevant places to start

These are starting points for sources, not an exhaustive literature review.

Gynaecological health

Why does it still take several years to receive an endometriosis diagnosis, and which patients wait the longest?

Partially addressed

Published sources address parts of the question, but not the whole question or the entire target population.

Time to diagnosis can affect treatment, education, employment and quality of life.

What is the status, and when was it assessed?

Norwegian and international research document diagnostic delays of several years. Differences between patient groups have been described internationally, but current Norwegian differences and the effects of interventions are not adequately established here.

Editorially reviewed: 2026-11-03.

The knowledge status is updated only after a documented review of the evidence.

Change history

2026-11-03 · First documented review

Six knowledge questions were linked to relevant published reviews and some registered research projects. None of the questions has been declared definitively answered.

2026-11-03 · Revised endometriosis question following source verification

Norwegian and international research document diagnostic delays of several years. The question was therefore reframed to address causes, differences between patient groups and the current situation in Norway.

2026-11-03 · Norwegian and global research added for all six questions

What do we know, and what still needs investigation?

What do we know?

A Norwegian study found a mean of 6.7 years and a median of 5 years from symptom onset to an endometriosis diagnosis. An international review of 23 studies found an average of 6.8 years. In a US registry study, the time following a recorded pelvic pain diagnosis was longer for Black than for White patients, with medians of 1.34 and 0.67 years, respectively. These are different measures of time.

What do we still need to find out?

We need up-to-date Norwegian care pathways broken down by age, geography, ethnic and social background, and evidence of interventions that reduce delays.

How do we investigate this?

Distinguish different measures of time, medians and means, diagnostic criteria and recruitment. Do not directly transfer US disparities to Norway.

Published research relevant to this question

Norwegian study: diagnostic delay in endometriosis (2003)
261 women with surgically confirmed endometriosis; mean 6.7 years and median 5 years. Not a recent nationally representative estimate.
International review of diagnostic delay (2024)
23 studies; mean of 6.8 years, but substantial differences between countries.
USA: differences by ethnicity (2025)
Measures time following a recorded pain diagnosis; Black and White patients had different medians. Not directly comparable with time from symptom onset.
ESHRE: Evidence for diagnosis and treatment
Guideline for diagnosis and treatment, not a new Norwegian estimate of time to diagnosis.
Systematic review of diagnostic delay and regional differences
17 observational studies using different definitions of diagnostic delay.

This is a selection of Norwegian and international original publications and reviews, not an exhaustive literature review. An indirectly relevant study does not necessarily answer the question.

Ongoing research

These are examples from registered research projects. They are not completed findings, and their status may change. Always check the original registration.

EndoCheck – image analysis when endometriosis is suspected
Examines technology for detecting endometriosis, not how long Norwegian patients wait from first symptom to diagnosis.
ClinicalTrials.gov · NCT05245695

No named ongoing study has yet been verified as directly answering this question. Explore the registry and verify the purpose, status and target population.

Explore ongoing research and original registrations

The question and relevant sources were last reviewed on 3 November 2026.

Relevant places to start

These are starting points for sources, not an exhaustive literature review.

Working life

Who experiences the greatest work-related burden associated with menopause, and which measures help?

Partially addressed

Published sources address parts of the question, but not the whole question or the entire target population.

Better knowledge may support appropriate workplace adjustments and more informed conversations at work.

What is the status, and when was it assessed?

International systematic research and a Norwegian HUNT/registry analysis describe effects on working life. Effects of specific interventions and variation between occupational groups require further investigation.

Editorially reviewed: 2026-11-03.

The knowledge status is updated only after a documented review of the evidence.

Change history

2026-11-03 · First documented review

Six knowledge questions were linked to relevant published reviews and some registered research projects. None of the questions has been declared definitively answered.

2026-11-03 · Norwegian and global research added for all six questions

What do we know, and what still needs investigation?

What do we know?

A systematic review of 29 studies found associations between menopausal symptoms, sleep and perceived work functioning. A Norwegian IZA discussion paper using HUNT and registry data from 2025 reported associations with lower income and more sickness absence. These outcomes are not interchangeable.

What do we still need to find out?

We need more knowledge about differences between occupations and groups, and the effects of workplace adjustments and treatment on work, absence and quality of life.

How do we investigate this?

Distinguish self-reported functioning from registry-based sickness absence and income, and associations from demonstrated intervention effects.

Published research relevant to this question

Menopause and the workplace in the pharmaceutical industry
US workplace survey; cannot establish prevalence in Norway.
Treatment for hot flushes, employment and estimated costs
International analysis of treatment and estimated costs, not Norwegian prevalence.
Systematic review: menopause and work (29 studies)
Findings on symptoms and work functioning, but no clear answers about workplace interventions.
Norwegian HUNT/registry analysis: Beyond Hot Flashes (2025)
Norwegian findings about employment and sickness absence, currently published as a discussion paper.

This is a selection of Norwegian and international original publications and reviews, not an exhaustive literature review. An indirectly relevant study does not necessarily answer the question.

Ongoing research

These are examples from registered research projects. They are not completed findings, and their status may change. Always check the original registration.

No specific ongoing study has yet been selected for this question.

No named ongoing study has yet been verified as directly answering this question. Explore the registry and verify the purpose, status and target population.

Explore ongoing research and original registrations

The question and relevant sources were last reviewed on 3 November 2026.

Relevant places to start

These are starting points for sources, not an exhaustive literature review.

Prevention

What barriers to cervical screening are documented, and which interventions reduce disparities in participation?

Partially addressed

Published sources address parts of the question, but not the whole question or the entire target population.

Differences in participation can matter when providing screening information and making services accessible.

What is the status, and when was it assessed?

An international review of 106 studies and Norwegian qualitative research document barriers. Which interventions reach which groups in Norway needs further assessment.

Editorially reviewed: 2026-11-03.

The knowledge status is updated only after a documented review of the evidence.

Change history

2026-11-03 · First documented review

Six knowledge questions were linked to relevant published reviews and some registered research projects. None of the questions has been declared definitively answered.

2026-11-03 · Norwegian and global research added for all six questions

What do we know, and what still needs investigation?

What do we know?

A systematic review of 106 studies among women aged 30 or younger documented practical barriers, discomfort, cost and information needs. A Norwegian interview study from 2025 with 18 women aged 25–29 examined trust, information, social expectations and vulnerability during the examination.

What do we still need to find out?

We need stronger evidence about which interventions reduce disparities between groups in Norway and whether their effects persist across multiple screening rounds.

How do we investigate this?

Distinguish interviews and attitudes from representative participation rates and experiments measuring the effects of interventions.

Published research relevant to this question

HPV self-testing and screening participation in Singapore
Intervention study in Singapore; cannot establish why younger Norwegian women do not attend.
Systematic review of barriers among younger women (106 studies)
International barriers; differing health systems limit direct transfer.
Norwegian interview study of screening participation among women aged 25–29
18 interviews; describes experiences and reasons, not population rates.

This is a selection of Norwegian and international original publications and reviews, not an exhaustive literature review. An indirectly relevant study does not necessarily answer the question.

Ongoing research

These are examples from registered research projects. They are not completed findings, and their status may change. Always check the original registration.

HPV-based screening among women aged 23–29
Examines HPV screening in a younger age group. It must not be interpreted as a Norwegian study of reasons for low participation.
ClinicalTrials.gov · NCT05229679

No named ongoing study has yet been verified as directly answering this question. Explore the registry and verify the purpose, status and target population.

Explore ongoing research and original registrations

The question and relevant sources were last reviewed on 3 November 2026.

Relevant places to start

These are starting points for sources, not an exhaustive literature review.

Contraception

What do we know about why women start, change or stop contraception, and who cannot find a suitable alternative?

Partially addressed

Published sources address parts of the question, but not the whole question or the entire target population.

Understanding experiences and information needs is relevant to better counselling and informed choices.

What is the status, and when was it assessed?

A global analysis of 61 countries and a Norwegian study of healthcare professionals' advice identify factors in contraceptive decisions, but not interventions that suit every group in Norway.

Editorially reviewed: 2026-11-03.

The knowledge status is updated only after a documented review of the evidence.

Change history

2026-11-03 · First documented review

Six knowledge questions were linked to relevant published reviews and some registered research projects. None of the questions has been declared definitively answered.

2026-11-03 · Norwegian and global research added for all six questions

What do we know, and what still needs investigation?

What do we know?

An international analysis from 2025 of 1,539,071 episodes of contraceptive use across 61 countries found that side effects and health concerns are important reasons for discontinuation, while the ability to switch methods is central. A Norwegian qualitative study examined how healthcare professionals' counselling influences contraceptive choices among adolescents.

What do we still need to find out?

We need better documentation of how counselling, autonomy, cost and side effects affect different groups, and which interventions support informed choices without pressure.

How do we investigate this?

Distinguish stopping, switching and wanting to become pregnant. Separate healthcare professionals' perspectives from users' experiences, and examine differences by country and age.

Published research relevant to this question

Hormonal contraception and depression in Finnish healthcare registries
Indirectly relevant; did not examine reasons for starting, switching or stopping.
Global analysis of contraceptive discontinuation and method switching (61 countries)
1,539,071 episodes of use; not a separate estimate for young Norwegian users.
Norwegian qualitative study of contraceptive prescribing to adolescents (2026)
23 healthcare professionals at six youth services; not representative of all users' experiences.

This is a selection of Norwegian and international original publications and reviews, not an exhaustive literature review. An indirectly relevant study does not necessarily answer the question.

Ongoing research

These are examples from registered research projects. They are not completed findings, and their status may change. Always check the original registration.

Family planning: experiences, preferences, needs and barriers
Registered project about preferences and barriers. Target population and country must be checked before applying findings to young people in Norway.
ClinicalTrials.gov · NCT06733831

No named ongoing study has yet been verified as directly answering this question. Explore the registry and verify the purpose, status and target population.

Explore ongoing research and original registrations

The question and relevant sources were last reviewed on 3 November 2026.

Relevant places to start

These are starting points for sources, not an exhaustive literature review.

Pregnancy and the postnatal period

What barriers prevent access to mental healthcare after childbirth, and who does not receive the follow-up they need?

Partially addressed

Published sources address parts of the question, but not the whole question or the entire target population.

Care after childbirth concerns both physical and mental health, as well as access to healthcare.

What is the status, and when was it assessed?

International reviews document barriers to mental healthcare. A Norwegian study of postnatal check-ups informs contact with services but does not measure unmet mental healthcare needs.

Editorially reviewed: 2026-11-03.

The knowledge status is updated only after a documented review of the evidence.

Change history

2026-11-03 · First documented review

Six knowledge questions were linked to relevant published reviews and some registered research projects. None of the questions has been declared definitively answered.

2026-11-03 · Norwegian and global research added for all six questions

What do we know, and what still needs investigation?

What do we know?

An umbrella review of 32 research reviews describes stigma, healthcare-system challenges and social barriers to mental healthcare during pregnancy and after birth. A Norwegian study published in 2025 found that 254 of 351 respondents attended a postnatal check-up; this is not a measure of unmet mental healthcare needs.

What do we still need to find out?

We need better Norwegian data about unmet mental healthcare needs, the quality of follow-up, language and cultural barriers and the effects of interventions that improve access to treatment.

How do we investigate this?

Distinguish postnatal check-ups, mental health screening, treatment actually received and perceived unmet need. Check response rates and representativeness.

Published research relevant to this question

COSI: Parenting support and mental health
English treatment trial; did not measure unmet healthcare needs in Norway.
Umbrella review of barriers to perinatal mental healthcare (32 reviews)
Identifies barriers throughout the care pathway; not a Norwegian rate of unmet need.
Norwegian study of postnatal check-up attendance and content (2025)
351 of 1,119 invited people responded; attendance does not establish whether mental healthcare was sufficient.

This is a selection of Norwegian and international original publications and reviews, not an exhaustive literature review. An indirectly relevant study does not necessarily answer the question.

Ongoing research

These are examples from registered research projects. They are not completed findings, and their status may change. Always check the original registration.

Engage & Connect – psychotherapy for postnatal depression
Tests treatment for postnatal depression. Does not answer how many people in Norway lack necessary mental healthcare.
ClinicalTrials.gov · NCT05585164

No named ongoing study has yet been verified as directly answering this question. Explore the registry and verify the purpose, status and target population.

Explore ongoing research and original registrations

The question and relevant sources were last reviewed on 3 November 2026.

Relevant places to start

These are starting points for sources, not an exhaustive literature review.

Contribute to Tidlignok Insight

What do you wish we knew more about?

You can send us questions and topic suggestions. They arrive in our internal inbox, where we use them to make existing research and statistics easier to find and understand. Submitted questions are not published.

About this work

Tidlignok presents published research and statistics. Through these cards, we do not assess the quality of every study within a topic. A question's status may change following documented source verification. The knowledge questions were created on 3 November 2026; individual sources have their own publication dates.