Coping with dysmenorrhea: a qualitative analysis of period pain management among students who menstruate.

BACKGROUND: Dysmenorrhea, or period pain, affects up to 95% of menstruating individuals and is a common cause of educational absenteeism among students who menstruate worldwide. Evidence suggests that students may lack sufficient knowledge about their menstrual health, which may impede self-management. The aim of the current study was to explore pain management strategies used by students in Ireland with painful periods and to identify their unaddressed needs across physical, psychological, educational, and social domains. METHODS: This study used a qualitative, interpretive design and opportunity sampling approach to collect and interpret individual accounts of dysmenorrhea from third-level students in Ireland. Data from 21 students were collected using semi-structured online one-to-one interviews and analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Analysis resulted in the construction of five themes: (1) Pain management is self-directed trial-and-error, (2) Home as safe haven, (3) Prioritising productivity over pain, (4) We're missing an option between 'normalise' and 'medicalise', and (5) Cycle of censorship and concealment. Overall, limited formal education on dysmenorrhea and prevailing negative attitudes towards menstruation create an unsupportive environment for students to learn adequate coping skills. Beyond education, menstrual stigma may also restrict the availability of clear management guidance in domestic and medical spheres. Experiences of dysmenorrhea were also influenced by the COVID-19 pandemic, where work-from-home measures were viewed favourably by individuals with dysmenorrhea. CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates that students in Ireland are inadequately prepared to cope with dysmenorrhea. The current findings have substantial implications for evaluating and reforming current menstrual education standards, in addition to clarifying the negative effects of social stigma on menstrual health literacy.

A scoping review of research on the determinants of adherence to social distancing measures during the COVID-19 pandemic.

This scoping review focused on answering key questions about the focus, quality and generalisability of the quantitative evidence on the determinants of adherence to social distancing measures in research during the first wave of COVID-19. The review included 84 studies. The majority of included studies were conducted in Western Europe and the USA. Many lacked theoretical input, were at risk for bias, and few were experimental in design. The most commonly coded domains of the TDF in the included studies were 'Environmental Context and Resources' (388 codes across 76 studies), 'Beliefs about Consequences' (34 codes across 21 studies), 'Emotion' (28 codes across 12 studies), and 'Social Influences' (26 codes across 16 studies). The least frequently coded TDF domains included 'Optimism' (not coded), 'Intentions' (coded once), 'Goals' (2 codes across 2 studies), 'Reinforcement' (3 codes across 2 studies), and 'Behavioural Regulation' (3 codes across 3 studies). Examining the focus of the included studies identified a lack of studies on potentially important determinants of adherence such as reinforcement, goal setting and self-monitoring. The quality of the included studies was variable and their generalisablity was threatened by their reliance on convenience samples.

Investigating and evaluating evidence of the behavioural determinants of adherence to social distancing measures - A protocol for a scoping review of COVID-19 research.

Background: The WHO has declared the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) as a pandemic. With no vaccine currently available, using behavioural measures to reduce the spread of the virus within the population is an important tool in mitigating the effects of this pandemic. As such, social distancing measures are being implemented globally and have proven an effective tool in slowing the large-scale spread of the virus. Aim: This scoping review will focus on answering key questions about the state of the evidence on the behavioural determinants of adherence to social distancing measures in research on COVID-19.  Methods: A scoping review will be conducted in accordance with guidelines for best practice. Literature searches will be conducted using online databases and grey literature sources. Databases will include Medline, Web of Science, Embase and PsycInfo, alongside relevant pre-print servers. Grey literature will be searched on Google Scholar. Screening, data extraction and quality appraisal will be conducted by members of the research team, with any discrepancies resolved by consensus discussion. Quality appraisal will be conducted using the Cochrane's ROBINS-I tool, the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, and the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist where appropriate. Results will be analysed by mapping findings onto the Theoretical Domains Framework and visualising characteristics of the included studies using EviAtlas. This scoping review is pre-registered with Open Science Framework. Conclusions The results of this study may facilitate the systematic development of behavioural interventions to increase adherence to social distancing measures.

Investigating and evaluating evidence of the behavioural determinants of adherence to social distancing measures - A protocol for a scoping review of COVID-19 research

Background: The WHO has declared the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) as a pandemic. With no vaccine currently available, using behavioural measures to reduce the spread of the virus within the population is an important tool in mitigating the effects of this pandemic. As such, social distancing measures are being implemented globally and have proven an effective tool in slowing the large-scale spread of the virus. Aim: This scoping review will focus on answering key questions about the state of the evidence on the behavioural determinants of adherence to social distancing measures in research on COVID-19.  Methods: A scoping review will be conducted in accordance with guidelines for best practice. Literature searches will be conducted using online databases and grey literature sources. Databases will include Medline, Web of Science, Embase and PsycInfo, alongside relevant pre-print servers. Grey literature will be searched on Google Scholar. Screening, data extraction and quality appraisal will be conducted by members of the research team, with any discrepancies resolved by consensus discussion. Quality appraisal will be conducted using the Cochrane's ROBINS-I tool, the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, and the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist where appropriate. Results will be analysed by mapping findings onto the Theoretical Domains Framework and visualising characteristics of the included studies using EviAtlas. This scoping review is pre-registered with Open Science Framework. Conclusions The results of this study may facilitate the systematic development of behavioural interventions to increase adherence to social distancing measures.