SynthesisBMC women's health2026
Prevalence of menstrual cup usage among reproductive-age women in asian countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC women's health, 2026. 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEffective menstrual hygiene management (MHM) is essential for women’s health, especially in low-resource settings. Menstrual cups are an eco-friendly and cost-effective alternative to disposable menstrual products. This study aims to systematically review the prevalence of menstrual cup use across Asian countries, providing insights into its acceptance, and potential for wider adoption.
methodsThe study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024546114). A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Ovid up to June 2023. Study quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) tool. A meta-analysis was performed using Generalized Linear Mixed Models (GLMMs) with logit transformation. Heterogeneity was evaluated using the I2 statistic and Cochran’s Q test, and a random-effects model was applied. Publication bias was examined through visual inspection of funnel plots and tested using Begg and Mazumdar’s rank correlation method. Statistical analyses were conducted using the Meta and Metafor packages in R software.
resultsThe study identified 3,919 records from various databases, including PubMed (624), Scopus (1,824), EMBASE (998), CINHAL (181), and Ovid (178). After removing 1,641 duplicate records, 2,278 records were screened, out of which 13 studies that reported the prevalence of menstrual cup usage were included in the final analysis. The pooled prevalence of menstrual cup usage was estimated at 2.68% (95% CI: 1.24%–5.67%), based on a total sample size of 257,347 individuals. The pooled estimate did not change significantly in subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis. However, substantial heterogeneity was observed (I2 = 99.6%), indicating significant variation across studies.
conclusionMenstrual cup usage among Asian women remains limited and is primarily confined to a specific, educated subgroup. Due to the high heterogeneity of studies, the pooled estimates should be interpreted with caution. Future research should focus on community-based epidemiological studies to gain a better understanding of adoption patterns, address barriers, and promote acceptance among reproductive-aged women.
trial registrationThe study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (Registration ID: CRD42024546114)
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.