Trial reportFrontiers in public health2024
Water, sanitation and hygiene at sex work venues to support menstrual needs.
Trial report in Frontiers in public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Characterizing the bacterial surface profiles of menstrual cups and their association with user characteristics and vaginal microbiomes in an adolescent cohort from western Kenya.Gates open research · 2026Trial
- A qualitative exploration of menstrual management practices and the impact of menstruation on the livelihoods of female sex workers in a peri-urban area of western Kenya.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2026Article
- Factors influencing menstrual hygiene knowledge, attitudes, and practices among adolescent girls in African rural schools: scoping review.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2025Review
- Water, sanitation and hygiene insecurity predict abscess incidence among people who inject drugs in a binational US-Mexico metropolitan area: A longitudinal cohort study.The International journal on drug policy · 2024Article
- A brief instrument measuring the water, sanitation and hygiene domain of menstrual health among women who inject drugs.PloS one · 2024Article
- Article
- Assessment of the barriers towards menstrual hygiene management: evidence from a qualitative study among school communities: lessons from Bahir Dar city in northwest Ethiopia.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2024Article
- Initial insights into the menstrual disc and considerations for implementation among female sex workers in Kenya.Women's health (London, England)Article
- Associations between extreme weather events, resource insecurities, and HIV vulnerabilities with self-reported urinary tract infection symptoms among adolescent girls and young women in Kenya.The journal of climate change and healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Adequate menstrual health and hygiene (MHH) is necessary for women's health and equity of all menstruators. Female sex workers (FSW) require good MHH to prevent discomfort and exposure to pathogens. No studies have evaluated water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) conditions of FSW. We report on a cross-sectional WASH assessment at FSW venues in Kisumu, western Kenya. Methods: Stakeholders identified 77 FSW venues in Kisumu, of which 47 were randomly sampled and visited between April-May 2023. A standardized structured survey of WASH conditions was deployed by trained research staff using Android tablets after proprietor's consent. WASH scores ranging 0-3 were computed based on point each for direct observation of water available, soap available, and acceptable latrine. MHH scores ranging between 0-4 were computed (one point each) for direct observation of: currently available soap and water, locking door on a usable latrine, functional lighting, and a private area for changing clothes or menstrual materials, separate from the latrine(s). WASH and MHH scores were compared by venue type using non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis tests, and non-parametric Spearman rank tests. Results: Full WASH criteria was met by 29.8% of venues; 34.0% had no adequate WASH facilities; 46.8% had no female latrine; and 25.5% provided soap and water in private spaces for women. While 76.6% had menstrual waste disposal only 14 (29.8%) had covered bins. One in 10 venues provided adequate MHM facilities. Poorest WASH facilities were in brothels and in bars, and three-quarters of bars with accommodation had no MHH facilities. Discussion: WASH and MHH services were sub-optimal in the majority of FSW venues, preventing menstrual management safely, effectively, with dignity and privacy. This study highlights the unmet need for MHH support for this population. Poor MHH can deleteriously impact FSW health and wellbeing and compound the stigma and shame associated with their work and ability to stay clean. Acceptable and cost-effective solutions to sustainably improve WASH facilities for these populations are needed. Trial registration: Clinicaltrial.gov NCT0566678.
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.