Barriers to Women’s Menstrual Hygiene Practices during Recurrent Disasters and Displacement: A Qualitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Disasters that involve displacement are particularly challenging for managing personal and menstrual hygiene, which can increase the risk of toxic shock syndrome, infections and other health conditions that can endanger women's lives. This study aimed to examine the menstrual hygiene challenges experienced by internally displaced women affected by recurrent natural disasters and subsequent displacement in the context of a low-middle-income country, i.e., Pakistan. A critical ethnographic study was undertaken in disaster-relief camps in the northern region of Pakistan. Data were collected using multiple methods, including field observations, review of media reports and in-depth interviews with 18 women. The findings suggested that the key barriers to the personal and menstrual hygiene of women during recurrent disasters and displacement in the mountainous rural region of Pakistan include inadequate housing, lack of infrastructure and humanitarian aid, no waste disposal system and lack of women-friendly spaces in disaster-relief camps. Community-based collaboration is necessary for the implementation of effective interventions. A comprehensive menstrual response to promote the health and well-being of women during disasters must include menstruation supplies, supportive facilities (mainly toilets and bathing facilities), supplementary supplies for storing, washing and drying, disposal/waste management facilities, education and culturally appropriate spaces and supplies.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".