Status, Gaps and Challenges in Menstrual Health in India: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This systematic review was conducted to evaluate the current status of menstrual hygiene management among adolescent girls in India. Inclusion criteria were (1) studies from India, (2) articles published in peer-reviewed journals, (3) any study design reporting menstruation health, (4) articles published in the English language and (5) study participants being adolescent girls aged 12–19 years. All the studies were systematically reviewed, and their quality was assessed using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. A total of 52 studies were included. The studies reported that majority of adolescent girls had a basic understanding of menstruation mechanics and predominantly used sanitary napkins. However, challenges persisted due to cultural taboos and inadequate hygiene facilities, particularly in rural schools and communities. Despite these hurdles, there was a rise in the awareness and the use of sanitary products over the years; furthermore, there was a positive impact of various government programmes and schemes, which has enhanced the knowledge and improved menstrual health management among adolescent girls, resulting in reduced absenteeism from schools. Further, a very few studies reported about the discard of menstrual waste material, and majority were not aware of the discard method. There is a gap in the effectiveness of governmental programmes, which aim to enhance menstrual hygiene by providing the sanitary products and the waste disposal facilities. To improve menstrual hygiene in India, comprehensive educational initiatives are needed to address misconceptions and stigma, when simultaneously enhancing access to affordable sanitary products and environmentally safe disposal facilities.
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 | 0.036 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| 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".