An Exploratory Systematic Review and Meta-analysis on Period Poverty
World journal of meta-analysis(2023)
Abstract
Background Period poverty is a global health and social issue that needs to be addressed. The primary aim of this study was to provide a comprehensive understanding on period poverty, including outcomes associated menstruation.
Methods All observational and randomised clinical trials reporting menstruation challenges, menstrual poverty and menstrual products were included. Our search strategy included multiple electronic databases of PubMed, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, ProQuest and EMBASE. Studies published in a peer review journal in English between the 30th of April 1980 and the 30th of April 2022 were included. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the risk of bias (RoB) of the systematic included studies. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) together with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) are reported overall and for sub-groups.
Results A total of 80 studies were systematically selected, where 38 were included in the meta-analysis. Of the 38 studies, 28 focused on children and young girls (i.e., 10-24 years old) and 10 included participants with a wider age range of 15-49 years. The prevalence of using disposable sanitary pads was 45% (95% CI = [0.35,0.58]). The prevalence of menstrual education pre-menarche was 68% (95% CI = [0.56, 0.82]). The prevalence of good MHM was 39% (95% CI = [0.25, 0.61]). Women in rural area (OR = 0.30, 95% CI = [0.13, 0.69]) were 0.70 times less likely to have good MHM practices than those living in urban area.
Discussion There was a lack of evidence, especially from low- and middle-income countries. Further research to better understand the scope and prevalence of period poverty should be considered. This will enable the development of improved policies to increase access to menstrual products and medical support where necessary.
Funding Not Applicable
Registration A systematic methodology was developed and published (CRD42022339536).
### Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
### Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding
### Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors
* (MHM)
: Menstrual hygiene management
(WHO)
: World Health Organisation
(UNICEF)
: United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund
(LMICs)
: Low-middle-income countries
(MICs)
: Middle-low-income countries
(HICs)
: High-income countries
MoreTranslated text
Key words
poverty,exploratory systematic review,systematic review,period,meta-analysis
AI Read Science
Must-Reading Tree
Example
![](https://originalfileserver.aminer.cn/sys/aminer/pubs/mrt_preview.jpeg)
Generate MRT to find the research sequence of this paper
Chat Paper
Summary is being generated by the instructions you defined