Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28002415›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2016

Menstruation and the Cycle of Poverty: A Cluster Quasi-Randomised Control Trial of Sanitary Pad and Puberty Education Provision in Uganda.

Paul Montgomery, Julie Hennegan, Catherine Dolan, Maryalice Wu, Laurel Steinfield, Linda Scott

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

50 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Adolescent Menstrual Health Literacy in Low, Middle and High-Income Countries: A Narrative Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Paul MontgomeryCentre for Evidence-Based Intervention, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Julie HenneganCentre for Evidence-Based Intervention, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Catherine DolanSOAS, University of London, London, United Kingdom.
Maryalice WuApplied Technologies for Learning in the Arts and Sciences, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, Illinois, United States of America.
Laurel SteinfieldBentley University, Waltham, MA, United States of America.
Linda ScottSaid Business School, University of Oxford, Oxford United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPoor menstrual knowledge and access to sanitary products have been proposed as barriers to menstrual health and school attendance. In response, interventions targeting these needs have seen increasing implementation in public and private sectors. However, there has been limited assessment of their effectiveness.

objectivesAssess the impact of providing reusable sanitary pads and puberty education on girls' school attendance and psychosocial wellbeing outcomes.

methodsA cluster quasi-randomised controlled trial was conducted across 8 schools, including 1124 girls, in rural Uganda. Schools were allocated to one of four conditions: the provision of puberty education alone; reusable sanitary pads alone; puberty education and reusable sanitary pads; and a control (no intervention). The primary outcome was school attendance. Secondary outcomes reflected psychosocial wellbeing.

resultsAt follow-up, school attendance had worsened for girls across all conditions. Per-protocol analysis revealed that this decline was significantly greater for those in the control condition d = 0.52 (95%CI 0.26-0.77), with those in control schools having a 17.1% (95%CI: 8.7-25.5) greater drop in attendance than those in any intervention school. There were no differences between the intervention conditions. High rates of school drop-out and transfer meant the trial suffered from substantial participant drop-out. Intention-to-treat analyses using two different imputation strategies were consistent with the main results, with mean differences of 5.2% attendance in best-case and 24.5% in worst-case imputations. Results were robust to adjustments for clustering. There was no impact of the interventions on girls' self-reported shame or insecurity during menstruation.

conclusionResults of the trial support the hypothesised positive impact of providing sanitary pads or puberty education for girls' school attendance in a developing country context. Findings must be interpreted with caution in light of poor participant retention, intervention fidelity, and the attendance measures used.

trial registrationPan African Clinical Trials Registry PACTR201503001044408.

Indexed as

Health EducationAdolescentChildCluster AnalysisFemaleHumansMenstrual Hygiene ProductsMenstruationPovertyPsychology, AdolescentPubertyRural PopulationSelf ReportStudent DropoutsSurveys and QuestionnairesUganda

Identifiers

PMID28002415
PMCPMC5176162

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.