ArticlePLOS global public health2024
Feasibility study of a menstrual health behaviour change intervention for women and girls with intellectual disabilities and their caregivers for Vanuatu's humanitarian responses.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Crisis affected people with intellectual disabilities: experiences of conflict, natural hazard related disaster, and public health emergencies.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Review
- Navigating menstruation in adolescents with Down Syndrome: A mixed-methods study of caregiver reflections and adolescent voices in the UK.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
- The ripple effect: impacts of climate change on menstrual health and paths to resilience.Frontiers in global women's health · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Veivanua campaign is a menstrual health intervention for people with intellectual disabilities and their caregivers in Vanuatu's humanitarian setting. The campaign was adapted from the Bishesta campaign delivered in Nepal's development setting. This feasibility study is designed to assess the feasibility and acceptability of the Veivanua campaign to understand if efficacy testing is warranted. The Veivanua campaign was delivered to a preselected group of 30 young people (individuals with intellectual disabilities) and 35 caregivers (males and females). Data were collected through several qualitative tools to allow for methods triangulation: process monitoring, post-intervention in-depth interviews with caregivers and nine young people, observation of young persons, photovoice and ranking with two young people, campaign resource ranking, and key informant interviews with staff involved in the intervention. Data were analysed thematically using Nvivo 12. Results show that the Veivanua campaign is feasible. Male and female caregivers reported an increased ability to support young people's menstrual health and greater preparedness for the next emergency. Young people understood the training and applied their learning. Key informants want to scale up the intervention in their humanitarian responses. Several changes were made to the adapted campaign, but similar outcomes were recorded in Nepal and Vanuatu. All target behaviours improved, and campaign resources were used, but many caregivers found the menstrual calendar confusing. The intervention was not delivered with fidelity but responded to the context. The campaign cost more than the Bishesta campaign because procurement was more expensive in Vanuatu. In conclusion, this is the first intervention globally, so it begins to fill a substantial gap, but more must be done. As the Veivanua campaign is feasible, it requires efficacy testing in Vanuatu. It should also be adapted to humanitarian crises in other countries to support the menstrual health of this previously excluded population.
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.