Trends in Research Studies on Menstrual Distress and Selfefficacy Among Adolescent Girls: A Bibliometric Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Menstrual hygiene is a complex issue that requires coordinated efforts at various levels, especially for adolescent girls. However, the lack of basic facilities like sanitary products, water supply, and a safe environment for changing pads limits their options for safe menstrual hygiene. To understand more about menstrual distress and self-efficacy among schoolgoing girls, we analyzed 6,681 publications from the Web of Science (WoS) Core Collection and 4,974 records from 2008 to 2022. The study used CiteSpace 6.1.R6 software for a thorough analysis, including Document Co-citation Analysis (DCA) to identify important studies and research clusters, as well as keyword co-occurrence analysis to reveal emerging trends in the literature. Furthermore, temporal analysis was conducted to examine publication trends over time, showing a notable rise in research output, especially in the past five years. The research on menstrual distress and selfefficacy is primarily focused in countries like the United States, England, China, Australia, and Canada, and institutions like the University of California, University of London, Harvard University, Pennsylvania Commonwealth System of Higher Education, and the University of North Carolina. Keywords like distress, life event, psychopathology, memory, and salivary cortisol indicate emerging trends in this field. The Document Co-citation Analysis (DCA) revealed that the studies on young women in middle-income countries are the predominant cluster in the domain of menstrual distress and self-efficacy. This bibliometric analysis helps identify potential contributors for future research on menstrual distress and hygiene among adolescent girls.
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 | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.141 | 0.068 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".