Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33052077›Full record

ArticleGlobal health action2020

The Menstrual Practices Questionnaire (MPQ): development, elaboration, and implications for future research.

Julie Hennegan, Agnes Nansubuga, Agnes Akullo, Calum Smith, Kellogg J Schwab

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Global health action, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  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

5 authors.

Julie HenneganThe Water Institute, Department of Environmental Health and Engineering, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health , Baltimore, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2011-1595
Agnes NansubugaIrise Institute East Africa , Jinja, Uganda.ORCID 0000-0003-1881-1568
Agnes AkulloIrise Institute East Africa , Jinja, Uganda.
Calum SmithIrise International , Sheffield, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7902-8214
Kellogg J SchwabThe Water Institute, Department of Environmental Health and Engineering, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health , Baltimore, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4966-8517

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

High-quality evidence is needed to inform policies and programmes aiming to improve menstrual health. Quantitative studies must address the many evidence gaps in this field, and practitioners have increased monitoring and evaluation efforts to track their progress. A significant barrier to improving the rigor of this work is the lack of comprehensive and comparable measures to capture core concepts. The Menstrual Practices Questionnaire (MPQ) is a new tool to support comprehensive and standardised assessment of the activities undertaken in order to collect, contain, and remove menstrual blood from the body in self-report surveys. The questionnaire is freely available online for download and can be adapted for use across contexts and age groups. In this article, we describe the purpose of the MPQ as a best-practice tool to align the description of menstrual practices and provide a foundation for further question refinement. We outline the development of the tool using systematic review of qualitative studies of menstrual experiences, audit of measures used in the study of menstrual health and hygiene, survey of experts, insights from past research, and examples from piloted questions in a survey of adolescent girls in Soroti, Uganda. We describe the identification of menstrual practices as a priority for measurement, coverage of practices included in the MPQ, and justify the inclusion of location-specific questions. For each section of the questionnaire, we outline key reasons for the inclusion of practice items alongside elaboration for users to help inform item selection. Finally, we outline priorities for future research to refine the assessment and reporting of menstrual practices, including the identification of minimum reporting requirements for population characteristics to facilitate comparison across studies, testing the extent to which experiences during the most recent menstrual period reflect those over longer time periods, and further exploration of biases in self-report.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeMenstruationSurveys and QuestionnairesAdolescentAdultFemaleHumansSelf ReportSystematic Reviews as TopicUgandaMenstrual healthmenstrual hygieneoutcome assessmentreproductive healthsurveywomen’s health

Identifiers

PMID33052077
PMCPMC7594862

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.