Examining differences in menstrual and intimate care product use by race/ethnicity and education among menstruating individuals

IF 2.3 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Frontiers in reproductive health Pub Date : 2023-12-06 DOI:10.3389/frph.2023.1286920
A. Zota, Elissia T Franklin, Emily B. Weaver, B. Shamasunder, Astrid Williams, Eva L. Siegel, Robin E. Dodson
{"title":"Examining differences in menstrual and intimate care product use by race/ethnicity and education among menstruating individuals","authors":"A. Zota, Elissia T Franklin, Emily B. Weaver, B. Shamasunder, Astrid Williams, Eva L. Siegel, Robin E. Dodson","doi":"10.3389/frph.2023.1286920","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"United States consumers spend over two billion dollars a year on intimate care products. These products, along with scented menstrual products, are marketed for odor control, perceived “freshness,” and vaginal/vulvar cleanliness. However, these scent-altering products may increase exposure to carcinogenic and endocrine-disrupting chemicals. Prior research has not adequately characterized demographic differences in product use. The objective of our study is to examine racial/ethnic and educational differences in menstrual and intimate care product use among people who menstruate.We pooled data from two US-based cross sectional studies to examine demographic characteristics and product use in 661 participants aged 18–54 years. Participants reported use of scented and unscented menstrual products (tampons, sanitary pads, and menstrual cups) and intimate care products (vaginal douches, sprays, wipes, and powders). We examined differences by race/ethnicity and education using log-binomial regression and latent class analysis (LCA), which can identify groups based on product use patterns.Our sample was 33.4% Black, 30.9% Latina, 18.2% White, and 16.2% another identity. Approximately half the population had a bachelor's degree or more; 1.4% identified as transgender and 1.8% as non-binary. In adjusted models, scent-altering products (i.e., scented menstrual and intimate care products) were more likely to be used by those with less formal education (p < 0.05). Unscented menstrual products were more likely to be used by those with more formal education. Compared to Black participants, White participants were more likely to use unscented tampons and menstrual cups and less likely to use douches and wipes (p < 0.05). Using LCA we identified two groups: one more likely to use scent-altering products, and a second more likely to use unscented menstrual products. Less education and older age, but not race/ethnicity, was significantly associated with membership in the group more likely to use scent-altering products. While sex/gender composition did not statistically vary across groups, all non-binary participants fell in the unscented menstrual product group.Lower educational attainment was consistently associated with greater use of scent-altering menstrual and intimate care products. Future research should examine associations between body odor stigma, product use, and health risks at intersections of race, class, and gender.","PeriodicalId":73103,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in reproductive health","volume":"39 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in reproductive health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/frph.2023.1286920","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

United States consumers spend over two billion dollars a year on intimate care products. These products, along with scented menstrual products, are marketed for odor control, perceived “freshness,” and vaginal/vulvar cleanliness. However, these scent-altering products may increase exposure to carcinogenic and endocrine-disrupting chemicals. Prior research has not adequately characterized demographic differences in product use. The objective of our study is to examine racial/ethnic and educational differences in menstrual and intimate care product use among people who menstruate.We pooled data from two US-based cross sectional studies to examine demographic characteristics and product use in 661 participants aged 18–54 years. Participants reported use of scented and unscented menstrual products (tampons, sanitary pads, and menstrual cups) and intimate care products (vaginal douches, sprays, wipes, and powders). We examined differences by race/ethnicity and education using log-binomial regression and latent class analysis (LCA), which can identify groups based on product use patterns.Our sample was 33.4% Black, 30.9% Latina, 18.2% White, and 16.2% another identity. Approximately half the population had a bachelor's degree or more; 1.4% identified as transgender and 1.8% as non-binary. In adjusted models, scent-altering products (i.e., scented menstrual and intimate care products) were more likely to be used by those with less formal education (p < 0.05). Unscented menstrual products were more likely to be used by those with more formal education. Compared to Black participants, White participants were more likely to use unscented tampons and menstrual cups and less likely to use douches and wipes (p < 0.05). Using LCA we identified two groups: one more likely to use scent-altering products, and a second more likely to use unscented menstrual products. Less education and older age, but not race/ethnicity, was significantly associated with membership in the group more likely to use scent-altering products. While sex/gender composition did not statistically vary across groups, all non-binary participants fell in the unscented menstrual product group.Lower educational attainment was consistently associated with greater use of scent-altering menstrual and intimate care products. Future research should examine associations between body odor stigma, product use, and health risks at intersections of race, class, and gender.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
按种族/族裔和教育程度审查月经期个人在使用月经和私密护理产品方面的差异
美国消费者每年在亲密护理产品上花费超过20亿美元。这些产品,连同有香味的月经产品,都是为了控制气味、感知“新鲜度”和阴道/外阴清洁而销售的。然而,这些改变气味的产品可能会增加致癌和干扰内分泌的化学物质的暴露。先前的研究没有充分表征产品使用的人口统计学差异。我们研究的目的是检查月经期人群在月经和亲密护理产品使用方面的种族/民族和教育差异。我们汇集了两项美国横断面研究的数据,以检查661名年龄在18-54岁的参与者的人口统计学特征和产品使用情况。参与者报告使用有香味和无香味的月经产品(卫生棉条、卫生巾和月经杯)和亲密护理产品(阴道灌洗液、喷雾、湿巾和爽身粉)。我们使用对数二项回归和潜在类分析(LCA)来检查种族/民族和教育的差异,这可以根据产品使用模式识别群体。我们的样本中黑人占33.4%,拉丁裔占30.9%,白人占18.2%,其他族裔占16.2%。大约一半的人口拥有学士或以上学位;1.4%被认定为跨性别者,1.8%被认定为非二元性别。在调整后的模型中,受教育程度较低的人更有可能使用改变气味的产品(即有香味的月经用品和亲密护理产品)(p < 0.05)。那些受过正规教育的人更有可能使用无味的月经产品。与黑人受试者相比,白人受试者更倾向于使用无味的卫生棉条和月经杯,而较少使用冲洗液和湿巾(p < 0.05)。使用LCA,我们确定了两组:一组更有可能使用改变气味的产品,第二组更有可能使用无气味的月经产品。受教育程度较低和年龄较大的人更有可能使用改变气味的产品,但与种族/民族无关。虽然性别/性别组成在组间没有统计学差异,但所有非二元参与者都属于无香味月经产品组。受教育程度越低,使用改变气味的月经和亲密护理产品的比例越高。未来的研究应该在种族、阶级和性别的交叉点上检查体臭污名、产品使用和健康风险之间的关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊最新文献
Close female friendships and knowledge of recommended abortion methods in Nigeria and the Democratic Republic of the Congo among a representative sample of reproductive-aged women. Preferences for pre-exposure prophylaxis delivery among HIV-negative pregnant and breastfeeding women in Zambia: evidence from a discrete choice experiment. Achieving HIV epidemic control through accelerating efforts to expand access to pre-exposure prophylaxis for people who inject drugs. Editorial: Environmental impacts on women's health disparities and reproductive health: advancing environmental health equity in clinical and public health practice. Sexual and reproductive health literacy and its associated factors among adolescents in Harar town public high schools, Harari, Ethiopia, 2023: a multicenter cross-sectional study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1