ArticleBMC women's health2024
Centring participant experience: a realist evaluation of a menstruator-friendly facility design project in a refugee settlement, Lebanon.
Article in BMC women's health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionMenstrual health in humanitarian contexts is a neglected topic. Its taboo nature presents difficulties for participants in menstrual health projects in these particularly challenging settings. Namely, their experiences may be concealed or overlooked in projects that are typically outcome focused. Realist Evaluation is a useful method to unearth and explore the hidden mechanisms and their causes, which lead to positive or negative participant experiences. The authors have applied this approach to a robust humanitarian menstrual health project to explore how to centre the emotional wellbeing of participants at all stages: prior to, during, and post-participation. STUDY
settingThe project studied was led by the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies who piloted their adaptable manual for menstruator-friendly water, sanitation and hygiene (WaSH) facility design in humanitarian contexts. It was conducted by the Lebanese Red Cross in an informal tented settlement hosting Syrian refugees in Qaa, Lebanon.
methodsThe authors collected interview and focus group data on the contextual factors and processes within the project from nine project staff and 16 settlement inhabitants. They used a realist process of theory development, testing, and consolidation to understand how and under what circumstances the project inputs affected participants' wellbeing.
resultsThe contextual factors and causal mechanisms promoting participant experience comprised individual (choices influencing and experience during participation), interpersonal (group dynamics and the role of non-menstruators), and organisational (expertise and knowledge, relationship to participants and cultural differences) factors. IMPLICATIONS: The research uses a case study from a renowned humanitarian organisation who provided a well-delivered project in a conducive environment to explore the mechanisms and contexts that can promote wider learning and refine understanding and programming in this under-researched and -theorised space. Specifically, it informs which contextual factors and project inputs must be present within a menstrual health project to ensure participant satisfaction whilst efficiently delivering well-designed menstruator-friendly WaSH facilities.
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.