MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407588421 · doi:10.1177/17455057251315972

Seeking help for menstrual pain during adolescence: A mixed-methods retrospective survey of treatment experiences and preferences

2025· article· en· W4407588421 on OpenAlexafffund
Kayla M Wall, Marta Erlandson, Michelle M. Gagnon

Bibliographic record

VenueWomen s Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMenstrual Health and Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchSaskatchewan Health Research Foundation
KeywordsMedicineThematic analysisFeelingYoung adultClinical psychologyDescriptive statisticsHealth careQualitative researchFamily medicinePhysical therapyPsychologyGerontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Menstrual pain can significantly impact adolescents' well-being and functioning. Despite the prevalence of adolescent menstrual pain, information about adolescents' experiences seeking treatment is limited. OBJECTIVES: We examined retrospective reports of help-seeking in adolescence among menstruators to better understand perceptions and experiences of interacting with the healthcare system due to menstrual pain. DESIGN: This study used an embedded mixed-methods design in which the qualitative and quantitative data were collected concurrently. METHODS: Young adults aged 18-25 who experienced menstrual pain in adolescence completed an online, mixed-methods survey of help-seeking experiences. Responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics and reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: = 21.78 years), 41% sought treatment for menstrual pain in adolescence and of these 43% found the treatments they were offered ineffective. Three themes were generated related to why treatment was perceived as unsuitable: "Side effects and risks of pharmacological treatment," "treatment not tailored to the individual," and "treatment seen as a band-aid solution." Participants perceived the treatment options as limited and likely not addressing the underlying cause of their pain. Four themes were generated related to perceived improvements to treatment seeking. Participants recommended that healthcare providers: "Go beyond contraceptives," "share and demonstrate expertise," "investigate menstrual pain," and "listen and do not dismiss." Participants reported that having more information, feeling validated, and understanding treatment recommendations would improve their experience. CONCLUSION: Participants perceived that their menstrual pain-related treatment needs were unmet in adolescence, despite being offered treatments that align with treatment guidelines for adolescent menstrual pain. Findings suggest that improving explanations about treatment provided to youth, along with improving communication and menstrual education, may lead to more optimal help-seeking experiences among adolescents.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.214
Threshold uncertainty score0.540

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.366 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWomen s HealthSame topicMenstrual Health and DisordersFrench-language works237,207