Menstrual Cup use among Nulliparous Women: Breaking Taboos and Empowering Communities - A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Menstrual cups offer a more comfortable menstruation experience, reducing disruptions to daily activities. They are eco-friendly and more cost-effective than other menstrual products. Our aim of the study was to understand menstrual cup use among nulliparous female and identify the challenges for their adoption and continued usage. Database-specific search strategies were formulated for Ovid, PubMed, Scopus, and Embase by using keywords such as "vaginal cup," "menstrual cup," and "nulliparous." The search was conducted on November 15, 2024, and eligible studies published till November 1, 2024 were searched. Various study designs were considered, while studies that did not mention the proportion of nulliparous females among menstrual cup users were excluded. Out of 40 identified records, 11 studies were included after screening. Studies involving nulliparous females from various regions, including Canada, the USA, India, Colombia, Zimbabwe, and Kenya, suggest that menstrual cups constitute a safe and comfortable option for menstrual hygiene management (MHM). Nulliparous females encounter unique obstacles such as limited awareness of their reproductive systems, fears and restrictions related to the unscientific concept of virginity, and limited accessibility to menstrual cups. These barriers are compounded by minimal technical and social support. Nulliparous females also face specific issues such as increased menstrual bleeding and loss of school or college hours, which can significantly be mitigated by using menstrual cups. Evidence suggests that menstrual cups can be a safe and comfortable option for MHM among nulliparous females. It is essential to debunk social myths and taboos, provide accessibility to menstrual cups, offer training, and build confidence in young females from menarche. Engaging multiple personnel at different levels and receiving supportive guidance from healthcare providers are critical steps to increase public awareness and acceptance of menstrual cups.
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 | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".