An intersectional exploration of alternative menstrual management strategies amongst menstruators in a Canadian context
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this thesis I work to understand what factors influence low-income menstruators' decisions to use alternative menstrual management strategies in the Canadian context. In order to provide a critical review of the factors associated with period poverty, I conduct an exploratory and critical analysis of how intersecting aspects of identity and social location influence diverse low-income menstruators’ decision to use alternative menstrual management strategies. A short survey and semi-structured interviews were conducted with menstruators who use alternative menstrual management strategies. Through the thematic reflexive analysis, the qualitative data suggests that menstruation is a multifaceted experience, that is dependent on a number of diverse, personal, and variable factors. The findings indicate that menstrual management decisions by low-income menstruators are motivated by a number of factors including improved practical management of menstrual bleeding, the mitigation of menstrual management related stress and pain, as well as stigma and de-stigmatization. Contextual factors that support low-income menstruators manage their menstruation include receiving period-positive and comprehensive menstrual education, having access to supportive relationships, and having access to the financial and emotional resources.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".