Abstract
Background Research on menstrual health is required to understand the needs of girls, women, and others who menstruate; and to strengthen programmes with evidence-based interventions to improve health, wellbeing, and productivity. The identification of research priorities is an important process to help researchers, policymakers, programmers, and funding agencies decide where to invest their efforts and resources.
Methods A modified version of the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) approach was utilized to reach consensus on a set of research priority questions. Multisector stakeholders with expertise in policy, programming, financial support, and/or research relating to menstrual health were identified through networks and the literature. Individuals were invited to submit priority questions through survey monkey online on i) understanding the problem; ii) designing and implementing interventions; iii) integrating and scaling up interventions. Responses were consolidated and individuals were then invited to rank these questions based on i) novelty; ii) potential for intervention; and iii) importance/impact. Research priority scores were calculated from these responses and analyzed to evaluate associations with social and occupational characteristics of participating respondents.
Results Eighty-two participants, of whom 89% were female and 39.0% from low- and middle-income countries (LMIC), proposed a total of 1135 research questions: 45.9% on understanding the problem, 39.7% on designing and implementing interventions, 12.7% on integrating and scale-up, plus 1.5% on other aspects. Questions were consolidated into a final list of 91 unique research questions. Sixty-six participants, of whom 80.3% were women and 39.4% from LMIC, ranked these questions. Top ten-ranked research priority questions comprised four questions on ‘understanding the problem’, four on ‘designing and implementing interventions’, one on ‘integrating and scaling up’, and one on ‘measurement and research’. Academics gave higher prioritization to ‘designing and implementing interventions,’ and lower prioritization to questions on ‘understanding the problem,’ ‘integrating and scaling up,’ and ‘measurement and research.
Conclusions Use of CHNRI generated unique research priority questions from expertise internationally. The top-ranking research priorities can be utilized by policymakers, programmers, researchers, and funders to guide future research in menstrual health.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Initials: PPH Grant number: N/A Funder: The Global Menstrual Collective URL: https://www.globalmenstrualcollective.org/ The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The project was approved by the Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine’s Research and Ethics Committee (ID# 20-055), as exemption given by the Human Reproduction Programme Research Protocol Review Panel and the WHO Ethics Review Committee (ID# ERC.0003407). Potential respondents were informed that their participation was voluntary, and they were free to stop responding to questions at any time. Written consent was obtained through the provision of a participant information sheet and consent on the online webpage. Participants had to tick that they consented to join the study before they could access the survey.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data are submitted in manuscript