MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3169489719 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-92846/v1

Practices and Predictors of Menstrual Hygiene Management Material Use Among Adolescent and Young Women in Rural Pakistan. A Cross-Sectional Study.

2020· preprint· en· W3169489719 on OpenAlexaff
Yaqub Wasan, Jo‐Anna B Baxter, Arjumand Rizvi, Fariha Shaheen, Qamaruddin Junejo, Amjad Hussain, Imran Ahmed, Sajid Soofi, Zulfiqar A Bhutta

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMenstrual Health and Disorders
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
FundersBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
KeywordsCross-sectional studyHygieneEnvironmental healthMedicinePsychologyDemographySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background In low- and middle-income countries, women often use inappropriate materials to manage menstruation, which can pose a hazard to their health. Inappropriate menstrual hygiene management (MHM) can also have important downstream consequences beyond physiologic health, including the restriction of adolescent girls’ access to academic pursuits. This impacts one’s quality of life and has potential economic consequences for society. Methods Among menstruating adolescent and young women 15-23 years of age living in rural Pakistan (n = 25,305), we aimed to describe MHM practices and generate a predictive model of the socioeconomic and demographic factors related to the use of MHM materials. Beliefs and barriers around MHM were also summarized. The outcome variable included: those who practiced appropriate (reported use of a sanitary pad or/and new piece of cloth) and inappropriate MHM (reported use of an old cloth and/or nothing). Logistic regression was used to generate the predictive model, with results presented as odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Results Inappropriate MHM practices were reported by 75% of participants. The majority (61.9%) reported using old cloths, 12.6% used nothing and 0.5% used old cloth with sanitary pad. One fourth of participants reported appropriate MHM material use, including, 16.2% sanitary pads, 8.6% new cloth and a few reported using sanitary pads with new cloth (0.2%). Inappropriate MHM practices were more common in lowest wealth quintile (OR 4.41; 95% CI = 2.77 to 7.01, P<0.0001), followed by those with no education (OR 3.9; 95% CI = 3.36 to 4.52, P<0.0001). Mothers were the primary source of information about menarche (84.5%). Among school-going girls, 22% reported not going to school while menstruating. The affordability of menstrual hygiene products, awareness of appropriate practices, access to clean supplies, and cultural beliefs were identified as factors contributing to MHM practices. Conclusions Findings indicate the need for multi-sectorial efforts to introduce MHM-specific and MHM-sensitive interventions to improve MHM practices, ranging from availability of low-cost MHM materials to the inclusion of MHM education in school curriculums and within community platforms. Trial Registration The trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT03287882).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.363 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch SquareSame topicMenstrual Health and DisordersFrench-language works237,207