ArticleBMC women's health2026
Menstrual hygiene management knowledge, practices, and prevalent restrictions among women of the reproductive age in Bheemdatta Municipality of Sudurpashchim Province Nepal: a mixed-methods study.
Article 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMenstrual hygiene management (MHM) is a fundamental aspect of women's health, yet it remains inadequately addressed in many low- and middle-income countries, including Nepal. This study aimed to assess knowledge, practices, and prevalent menstrual restrictions among women of reproductive age in Bheemdatta Municipality, Sudurpashchim Province, Nepal.
methodsA community-based concurrent mixed-method study was conducted among 161 women aged 15-49 years selected through multistage stratified sampling. Quantitative data were collected using a semi-structured questionnaire through face-to-face interviews and analyzed using SPSS version 22. Qualitative data from nine interviews (three IDIs and six KIIs) were thematically analyzed using NVivo 10 to substantiate the quantitative findings.
resultsOf the total participants, 94% had good knowledge of menstruation, and 90% recognized it as a physiological process. However, only 12% demonstrated good MHM practices, 64% had fair, and 24% had poor practices. Around 60% used sanitary pads, 24% alternated between pads and cloths, and 17% used cloths exclusively. Qualitative findings highlighted key barriers including financial constraints, limited access to sanitary products, inadequate water and disposal facilities, and deep-rooted socio-cultural taboos. Despite improved awareness, women reported facing restrictions during menstruation-most commonly avoiding temples (93%), cooking (74%), eating nutritious food (48%) and using bathroom (12%).
conclusionAlthough knowledge about menstruation was high, its translation into hygienic practices remains inadequate due to economic, infrastructural, and socio-cultural beliefs and restrictions. Interventions should prioritize behavioral change communication, subsidized menstrual products, and community engagement to dismantle harmful taboos and promote safe and dignified menstrual hygiene management.
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.