Prevalence of school absenteeism during menstruation and associated factors in sub-Saharan Africa: A systematic review and meta-analysis protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Although menstruation is a normal physiological process, it could affect several females’ daily activities. In most low resource settings, where menstrual hygiene management is poor and several schools have no water supply and separate toilet for female students, most school girls miss classes during menstruation. With the emergence of studies on menstrual hygiene management, it is evident that pooling several pocket studies is essential to draw lessons about effects of menstruation on female students’ class participation. Therefore, the aim of this review is to systematically assess the prevalence of school absenteeism and associated factors during menstruation among high school students in sub-Saharan Africa. Methods: The protocol for this systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (ID CRD42020223447). Electronic databases such as MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar will be searched for published articles using appropriate key terms. The identified articles will be assessed for meeting the eligibility criteria such as being published in English, conducted in sub-Saharan Africa, contain information on school absenteeism, and conducted in schools. Two reviewers will independently screen the identified articles using titles and abstracts followed by full text review of all potential articles. The quality of the included papers will be assessed using the adapted Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cross-sectional studies. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist will be employed to present the findings. Quantitative findings will be pooled using random effect meta-analysis model while the qualitative findings will be presented using narrative synthesis. Discussion: Analysis of existing evidence of school absenteeism during menstruation is essential for designing appropriate interventions in school and beyond. This review will present credible information that would help in designing evidence-based menstrual hygiene management for improving school attendance during menstruation in sub-Saharan Africa where more than half of female students miss classes during menstruation.Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42020223447
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".