ArticleFrontiers in reproductive health2026
Residence-based inequalities among women and girls aged 15-49 years using reusable and single-use menstrual materials in Ghana: a cross-sectional study.
Article in Frontiers in reproductive 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Menstrual health is a critical component of sexual and reproductive well-being, yet inequalities in access to appropriate menstrual materials persist, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). In Ghana, national progress in menstrual material use has been reported, but residence-based disparities remain insufficiently examined. This study assessed trends and rural-urban inequalities in the use of reusable and single-use menstrual materials among women and girls aged 15-49 years in Ghana. Methods: A repeated cross-sectional design was employed using nationally representative data from the 2016 Performance Monitoring for Action (PMA) survey and the 2017/18 Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS). Analysis was conducted using the WHO Health Equity Assessment Toolkit (HEAT). Survey data were accessed from the WHO HEAT platform and managed in Microsoft Excel prior to upload. Results: Reusable menstrual material use remained unchanged at 12.6% between 2016 and 2018. Single-use materials predominated (85.8% in 2016; 85.3% in 2018). Rural reusable use (21.3%; 18.0%) substantially exceeded urban use (5.5%; 7.4%). The absolute rural-urban difference narrowed from -15.8% to -10.6% for reusable, and 16.7% to 11.0% for single-use materials. Conclusion: Substantial and persistent residence-based inequalities in menstrual material use exist in Ghana. The study does not advocate for reusable over single-use materials, but calls for expanding safe, informed material choice across residential settings. Equity-responsive policies addressing affordability, access, and WASH infrastructure are urgently needed.
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.