Cited by 577Menstrual Health and DisordersHypothalamic control of reproductive hormonesAdolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 89 of the 93 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 193 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

Women’s and girls’ experiences of menstruation in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review and qualitative metasynthesis

Open access
Hennegan, Julie, Shannon, Alexandra K., Rubli, Jennifer, Schwab, Kellogg J., Melendez-Torres, G. J.·2019·PLOS Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Attention to women's and girls' menstrual needs is critical for global health and gender equality. The importance of this neglected experience has been elucidated by a growing body of qualitative research, which we systematically reviewed and synthesised. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We undertook systematic searching to identify qualitative studies of women's and girls' experiences of menstruation in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Of 6,892 citations screened, 76 studies reported in 87 citations were included. Studies captured the experiences of over 6,000 participants from 35 countries. This included 45 studies from sub-Saharan Africa (with the greatest number of studies from Kenya [n = 7], Uganda [n = 6], and Ethiopia [n = 5]), 21 from South Asia (including India [n = 12] and Nepal [n = 5]), 8 from East Asia and the Pacific, 5 from Latin America and the Caribbean, 5 from the Middle East and North Africa, and 1 study from Europe and Central Asia. Through synthesis, we identified overarching themes and their relationships to develop a directional model of menstrual experience. This model maps distal and proximal antecedents of menstrual experience through to the impacts of this experience on health and well-being. The sociocultural context, including menstrual stigma and gender norms, influenced experiences by limiting knowledge about menstruation, limiting social support, and shaping internalised and externally enforced behavioural expectations. Resource limitations underlay inadequate physical infrastructure to support menstruation, as well as an economic environment restricting access to affordable menstrual materials. Menstrual experience included multiple themes: menstrual practices, perceptions of practices and environments, confidence, shame and distress, and containment of bleeding and odour. These components of experience were interlinked and contributed to negative impacts on women's and girls' lives. Impacts included harms to physical and psychological health as well as education and social engagement. Our review is limited by the available studies. Study quality was varied, with 18 studies rated as high, 35 medium, and 23 low trustworthiness. Sampling and analysis tended to be untrustworthy in lower-quality studies. Studies focused on the experiences of adolescent girls were most strongly represented, and we achieved early saturation for this group. Reflecting the focus of menstrual health research globally, there was an absence of studies focused on adult women and those from certain geographical areas. CONCLUSIONS: Through synthesis of extant qualitative studies of menstrual experience, we highlight consistent challenges and developed an integrated model of menstrual experience. This model hypothesises directional pathways that could be tested by future studies and may serve as a framework for program and policy development by highlighting critical antecedents and pathways through which interventions could improve women's and girls' health and well-being. REVIEW PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: The review protocol registration is PROSPERO: CRD42018089581.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This systematic review and qualitative metasynthesis of 76 studies from 35 low- and middle-income countries found consistent menstrual stigma, resource limitations, knowledge and support gaps, and negative impacts on health, education, and social participation. It presents an integrated directional model linking sociocultural context and resource limitations to menstrual experience and downstream impacts.

Key findings

  • Of 6,892 citations screened, 76 studies reported in 87 citations were included, capturing over 6,000 participants across 35 countries; most studies were from sub-Saharan Africa (n = 45), followed by South Asia (n = 21), East Asia and the Pacific (n = 8), Latin America and the Caribbean (n = 5), Middle East and North Africa (n = 5), and Europe and Central Asia (n = 1).
  • Study quality was varied: 18 studies were rated high, 35 medium, and 23 low trustworthiness; lower-quality studies were characterised by poor reporting of participant selection and analysis.
  • Synthesis identified antecedents (sociocultural context including menstrual stigma and gender norms; knowledge; social support; behavioural expectations; resource limitations including physical and economic environments), experience components (menstrual practices, perceptions of practices and environments, confidence, shame and distress, containment, and individual menstrual factors), and impacts (physical and psychological health, education/employment, and social participation).
  • The integrated model maps distal and proximal antecedents through menstrual experience to impacts; no single included study reflected the full picture gained through metasynthesis.

Methods

  • Systematic review and qualitative metasynthesis reported according to PRISMA, with protocol registered on PROSPERO (CRD42018089581); searches were undertaken in 11 databases plus grey literature and hand searching, completed in January 2019 with no language or date restrictions.
  • Eligible studies reported qualitative analysis of menstrual experiences of women and girls residing in LMICs; studies exclusively on menstrual suppression, menopause, premenstrual syndrome, polycystic ovary syndrome, premenarche, key informants, or males were excluded, as were studies of menstrual interventions or products retained for analyses reported elsewhere.
  • Analysis used thematic synthesis and thematic networks; quality was appraised with the EPPI-Centre checklist, with one author appraising all studies and 10% independently appraised by a second author with 100% agreement; low-quality studies were checked for fit with the proposed themes and integrated model.

Limitations

  • The paper states that findings are limited by available studies; the majority came from sub-Saharan Africa, no studies were identified from China, Middle East and North African studies were more often urban and highly educated, searching was only undertaken in English, mixed-methods studies may have scored lower on the qualitative appraisal tool, and a different team may have generated different insights.
  • The paper states that adolescent girls were most strongly represented and early saturation was achieved for this group, while adult women and certain geographical areas were under-researched; pain and menstrual disorders were poorly integrated and did not reach saturation.
  • Evident from the text: most studies relied on focus group discussions, often capturing shared school-environment experiences rather than deep individual sociological or psychological insights, and adult women’s workplace experiences were under-researched.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002803

Cites

89 of 89 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

0 of 193 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

Show all 125 claims

  • Probably not a substantial claim. 47
  • It may state two separate claims as one. 75
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1
108 of 108
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The use of qualitative evidence in menstrual health programming has been anecdotal and situated, drawing on individual studies that may be restricted in scope and have limited generalizability beyond their context.

    “However, this use of qualitative evidence has been anecdotal and situated, drawing on individual studies that may be restricted in scope and have limited generalizability beyond their context.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Menstrual health research has tended to draw on programmatic models rather than detailed problem theory.

    “Menstrual health research has tended to draw on programmatic models rather than detailed problem theory.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Risk factors such as social support, the physical environment, cultural restrictions, and the perception of menses as dirty and needing to be concealed have received limited attention in interventions.

    “Social support, the physical environment, cultural restrictions, and the perception of menses as dirty and needing to be concealed were all highly salient in included studies, yet these risk factors have received limited attention in interventions.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Models focused exclusively on menstrual practices have assessed only physical harms such as infections.

    “Models focused exclusively on menstrual practices have assessed only physical harms such as infections.”
4 of 4

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Physical-environment low-trustworthiness count is one short

    Minor

    Table 3 reports three low-trustworthiness studies for this theme but names four.

1 of 1

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 93 references

4 of the 93 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–300 of 550

Metadata

Authors
Hennegan, J., Shannon, A. K., Rubli, J., Schwab, K. J., & Melendez-Torres, G. J.
Affiliations
Johns Hopkins University (US)
Corresponding author
Hennegan, Julie
Venue
PLOS Medicine
Published
2019-05-16
Volume
16
Issue
5
Pages
e1002803
ISSN
  • 1549-1277 (ISSN-L)
  • 1549-1676
OpenAlex
W2946739594
Cited by
577
References
93
Citations by year
2026: 123 · 2025: 101 · 2024: 101 · 2023: 69 · 2022: 65 · 2021: 69 · 2020: 39 · 2019: 8
FWCI
7.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Menstrual Health and Disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Hypothalamic control of reproductive hormones
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Adolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health
Keywords
menstruation, menstrual health, low- and middle-income countries, menstrual stigma, gender norms, menstrual products access, adolescent girls, sociocultural context, gender equality, menstrual health policy, menstrual health services, menstrual health education, sub-Saharan Africa
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adolescent Behavior, Adult, Child, Child Behavior, Cultural Characteristics, Developing Countries, Female, Humans, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Menstruation, Middle Aged, Public Opinion, Social Support, Stereotyping, Women's Health, Access to Information, Young Adult, Social Stigma, Reproductive Health

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-08, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-08 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review