ArticlePloS one2022
Use and perceptions on reusable and non-reusable menstrual products in Spain: A mixed-methods study.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 38 citations in OpenAlex.
- Linking knowledge, belief and awareness of menstrual cycle with oral health in young India women.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- Plastic Additives in Single-Use and Reusable Menstrual Products: Potential Implications for Human Health and the Environment.Environmental science & technology · 2025Article
- Menstrual product use patterns in a large digital cohort in the United States: variations by sociodemographic, health, and menstrual characteristics.American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2025Article
- Menstrual cup acceptability and functionality in real-world use: A cross-sectional survey of young people in Australia.The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology · 2025Article
- Menstrual hygiene management practices among rural females: findings from a rural health demographic environmental surveillance system (HDESS) cohort in Odisha, Eastern India.Frontiers in global women's health · 2025Article
- An intersectional approach on menstrual inequity as lived by women in circumstances of socioeconomic vulnerability in an urban and rural setting in Spain: a qualitative study.Sexual and reproductive health matters · 2024Article
- Menstrual products: culprits or bystanders in endometriosis and adenomyosis pathogenesis?Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2024Review
- Tampons as a source of exposure to metal(loid)s.Environment international · 2024Article
- A pharmacist's role in increasing access to menstrual products: an education and advocacy approach.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2024Article
- Reusable period products: use and perceptions among young people in Victoria, Australia.BMC women's health · 2023Article
- Menstrual cup and risk of IUD expulsion - a systematic review.Contraception and reproductive medicine · 2023Review
- Examining differences in menstrual and intimate care product use by race/ethnicity and education among menstruating individuals.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2023Article
- Menstrual health and management during the COVID-19 syndemic in the Barcelona area (Spain): A qualitative study.Women's health (London, England)Article
- A pilot survey of students' menstrual attitudes, experiences, and needs on an urban university campus.Women's health (London, England)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMenstrual products are necessary goods for women and people who menstruate to manage menstruation. Understanding the use and perceptions of menstrual products is key to promote menstrual equity and menstrual health. This study aimed at assessing the use and perceptions on menstrual products among women and people who menstruate aged 18-55 in Spain.
methodsA mixed-methods study was conducted, including a cross-sectional study (N = 22,823), and a qualitative study (N = 34).
resultsParticipants used a combination of products. Non-reusable products were the most used, while over half used reusable products. Usage changed when data were stratified by age, gender identification, completed education, country of birth and experiencing financial issues. It also varied between trans and cis participants. Menstrual products' use also shifted based on experiences of menstrual poverty and access to information and products. Overall, reusable products were perceived to be more acceptable than non-reusable. Barriers to use the menstrual cup were also identified, including experiences of menstrual inequity (e.g., menstrual poverty, lack of access to information or menstrual management facilities).
conclusionPerceptions and choices of menstrual products need to be acknowledged, especially when designing and implementing menstrual policies to address menstrual inequity and menstrual health.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.