Fig 1.
Flow chart of study selection for systematic review and meta-analysis of menstrual hygiene management and associated factors among adolescent girls in Ethiopia.
Table 1.
Descriptive summary of twenty-two studies included in the meta-analysis of MHM and associated factors among adolescent girls in Ethiopia (2004–2021).
Table 2.
Summarized description of studies on factors associated with menstrual hygiene management.
Fig 2.
Forest plot of the pooled proportion of safe MHM among adolescent girls in Ethiopia, studies published between 2004 and 2021.
Fig 3.
Subgroup analysis of menstrual hygiene management among adolescent girls by Ethiopian regions, studies published between 2004 and 2021.
Table 3.
Subgroup analysis of menstrual hygiene management among adolescent girls in Ethiopia, studies published between 2004 and 2021.
Table 4.
Pooled proportion of absorbents used, hygiene during menstruation, the disposal of the absorbent, use of a daily bath during menstruation, and school absenteeism during menstruation in Ethiopia studies published between 2004 and 2021.
Fig 4.
Sensitivity analysis for estimates on safe menstrual hygiene management proportion among adolescent girls in Ethiopia (number of estimates = 22).
Fig 5.
Reduction in proportion of safe MHM during 2004–2021 according to meta-regression.
This figure shows a meta-regression analysis of safe MHM proportion based on selected studies’ publication years. The vertical axis represents the log proportion of safe MHM, and the horizontal axis represents the selected studies’ publication year. Each circle demonstrates one selected study, and the size of each circle corresponds to the weight assigned to each study. The slope of the regression line indicates an increase or decrease of the study effect using REML estimation. Given the slope of the regression line is descending in this figure, it can be inferred that as the studies’ publication year has been increased, the proportion of safe MHM has been decreased. However, this association was not statistically significant (p = 0.952).
Fig 6.
Proportion of safe MHM among adolescent girls based on the sample size of selected studies by meta-regression analysis.
Circles show the weight of the included studies. The figure indicates the association between the safe MHM and sample size. The proportion of safe MHM was reduced with a rise in sample size. However, this association was not statistically significant (p = 0.853).
Table 5.
Related factors with the heterogeneity of safe MHM proportion in the current meta-analysis (based on univariate meta-regression).
Fig 7.
Funnel plot showing publication bias of proportion of MHM studies among adolescent girls in Ethiopia.
Fig 8.
Dots show included studies, the horizontal axis represents accuracy, and the vertical axis represents the standardized effect. The line shown in this figure is a regression line related to Egger’s regression test. It shows that whether this line cut the vertical axis at the point near zero or not. If this line distance from zero, it indicates a bias in publishing the results. If there is no publication bias, it is expected that this line passes from origin to a point near the origin. Since intercept (width from origin) is close to 0 in this figure, we conclude that there is no publication bias. Because zero is included in the confidence interval. Therefore, it could be concluded that the publication bias is not significant.