ArticlePloS one2025
Knowledge of the ovulatory cycle and its determinants among women of reproductive age in Papua New Guinea: Insights from a population-based study.
Article in PloS one, 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCorrect knowledge of the ovulatory cycle is crucial for preventing unintended pregnancies and improving women's reproductive health. However, the factors affecting this knowledge among women in Papua New Guinea (PNG) remain unclear. This study aimed to assess the prevalence and determine the factors influencing women's knowledge of the ovulatory cycle in PNG.
methodsData from the PNG Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) was analyzed. Multivariable logistic regressions were used to determine factors associated with women's knowledge of the ovulatory cycle. Adjusted odds ratios (aOR) with their 95% Confidence Intervals (CI) were reported. A p ≤ 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
resultsOf 12,580 women in this study sample, 22% (n = 2,773) had correct knowledge of the ovulatory cycle. Women from the Highlands region (aOR 1.31, 95% CI: 1.00-1.88) and the Momase region (aOR 1.56, 95% CI: 1.15-2.13), those who identified as Christians (aOR 3.01, 95% CI: 1.38-6.59), owned a mobile phone (aOR 1.29, 95% CI: 1.04-1.59), read a newspaper or magazine (aOR 1.30, 95% CI: 1.10-1.54), and had Internet access (aOR 1.21, 95% CI: 1.00-1.85) had higher odds of correct knowledge of the ovulatory cycle. Similarly, those who knew any contraceptive method (aOR 2.13, 95% CI: 1.58-2.87) and currently used the modern method (aOR 1.26, 95% CI: 1.02-1.56) or traditional/folkloric method (aOR 1.82, 95% CI: 1.36-2.43) were more likely to have correct knowledge of the ovulatory cycle. However, knowledge of the ovulatory cycle remained lower among women aged 15-24 and 25-34, those with lower education levels, and those from the Southern region.
conclusionsIn this study, less than a quarter of women had correct knowledge of the ovulatory cycle. Promoting reproductive health knowledge and awareness through educational curricula and mass media platforms could enhance women's understanding of the ovulatory cycle, particularly among younger and less educated and empower them to make informed decisions about their reproductive 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.