MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Menstrual knowledge and practices of female adolescents in urban Karachi, Pakistan

2009· article· en· W2069296186 on OpenAlexaff
Tazeen Saeed Ali, Syeda Naghma Rizvi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Adolescence · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMenstrual Health and Disorders
Canadian institutionsTellabs (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMenstruationMenarchePsychologyDescriptive statisticsDescriptive researchTest (biology)Developmental psychologyDemographyFamily medicineMedicineSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Menstruation is a normal physiological process that is managed differently according to various social and cultural understandings. Therefore, this cross-sectional study was conducted to explore the menstrual practices among 1275 female adolescents of urban Karachi, Pakistan from April to October 2006 by using interviews. Data was entered and analyzed in Epi Info Version 9 and SPSS Version 10. Descriptive findings showed that 50% of the girls lacked an understanding of the origin of menstrual blood and those with a prior knowledge of menarche had gained it primarily through conversations with their mothers. Many reported having fear at the first experience of bleeding. Nearly 50% of the participants reported that they did not take baths during menstruation. In univariate analysis, factors of using unhygienic material, using washcloths, and not drying under sun were found to be significant in the Chi square test among those going and not going to schools. This study concludes that there are unhygienic practices and misconceptions among girls requiring action by health care professionals.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.361 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations185
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of AdolescenceSame topicMenstrual Health and DisordersFrench-language works237,207