Knowledge and Practice of Menstrual Hygiene among Female Undergraduates at a Private Tertiary Institution in Nigeria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Menstrual hygiene is keeping the body clean while a woman is menstruating. Many females have encountered considerable difficulty maintaining menstrual hygiene because of a lack of awareness or access to menstrual products, particularly in low- andmiddle-income nations. However, knowledge and practice of menstrual hygiene among female undergraduates, especially in Nigeria, are understudied. This descriptive crosssectional study investigated the knowledge, practices and barriers associated with menstrual hygiene among female undergraduates of a private university in Nigeria. Three hundred and sixty-four participants were recruited using purposive sampling. Sociodemographic data, knowledge, practice and barriers associated with menstrual hygiene were assessed using a self-report knowledge and practice of menstrual hygiene questionnaire. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. The results revealed that most respondents (72.3%) had poor knowledge of menstrual hygiene, while around half (49.2%) maintained good practices. The most common barriers to practicing menstrual hygiene among the respondents were reported as fatigue and limited water access in their dormitories. Therefore, schools of higher learning need to ensure that students have regular access to clean water with adequate time between classes to allow for proper menstrual hygiene practice. Nurses could provide menstrual education for mothers and their adolescents before getting into university. Similarly, nurses working in institutions of higher learning should provide regular menstrual hygiene awareness programs on campus and advocate for access to clean water and hygiene facilities for female students undergoing menstruation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".