Aromatic Abdominal Massage for Alleviating Menstrual Pain in Nursing Students at Suez Canal University
Bibliographic record
Abstract
form their normal daily activities for one to three days each month. Aromatic abdominal massage is one of non –pharmacological methods can help women copes with the menstrual pain. Aim of study: was to assess the effect of aromatic abdominal massage by using (lavender, clary sage dissolved in almond oil) on alleviating menstrual pain intensity. Design: Experimental design. Setting: The study was conducted at Faculty of Nursing, Suez Canal University in Ismailia city. Sample: purposive sample of (106) nursing students having any degree of primary menstrual pain was recruited in this study. The sample divided randomly into study and control group (53 nursing students each). Tools of data collection:1) A structured interviewing questionnaire,2) Rating Analogue Scale, and 3) McGill pain questionnaire. Results: It revealed that the Rating Analogue Scale in first three days of the two consecutive cycles after intervention was significantly lower in interventional group than control group except in third day of menses in second cycle after intervention. Also, the mean score of all descriptors of McGill pain questionnaire were lesser in interventional group than in control group of the two consecutive cycles after intervention, but the difference was significant in the first cycle after intervention only. Conclusion: Abdominal massage with lavender and clary sage was effective on alleviating menstrual pain among nursing students having primary menstrual pain comparing to abdominal massage only. Recommendation: Abdominal massage with lavender and clary sage should be incorporated in nursing practice as a pain relieving measures for girls suffering from menstrual pain
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".