An Analysis of Teaching Menstrual Care Skills Using Single-Subject Methodology: A Systematic Literature Review.
Only seven single-subject studies on teaching menstrual care skills exist—use WWC standards to design the next high-quality one.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team hunted for every single-subject paper that taught girls and women with autism or ID how to handle periods. They looked back 40 years and found only seven studies.
Each study was scored against the What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) rules for strong proof. Just one study passed the toughest bar.
What they found
The evidence base is tiny. Seven papers, most with one or two kids, and weak designs.
Only one study used clean multiple-baseline logic and full data. The rest had gaps that break WWC trust.
How this fits with other research
Johnson et al. (2009) asked women with IDD about health knowledge. Many had wrong ideas about periods. Their voices match the review’s call for better teaching.
Meyer et al. (1987) showed that high-school students with moderate ID can learn a self-care skill—telephone use—and keep it 18 months. They used strong single-subject design. The period-care field needs the same rigor.
Groom-Sheddler et al. (2025) just proved video self-modeling can teach poison safety to autistic kids. Their clean design is the model the menstrual review says is missing.
Why it matters
You now know the field is wide open. If you run a menstrual-care program, you can be the first to post full WWC-proof data. Use multiple baseline, collect IOA, and graph every point. Your study could become the eighth paper—and the new gold standard.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Map your current menstrual-skill program against the WWC design checklist and fill any gaps before you start data collection
02At a glance
03Original abstract
PURPOSE: There is a paucity in research supporting procedures to teach skills needed during an individual's menstrual cycle. The purpose of this study was two-fold. First, a literature review was conducted to find publications on the topic of menstrual care. Second, the studies found were evaluated against What Works Clearinghouse™ (WWC) standards and analyzed to determine the presence of clinical components relevant to teaching these skills. METHODS: A literature review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. The review identified publications that taught menstrual care skills to individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) or other disabilities. The review focused specifically on studies that employed single-subject research methodology. Studies found were analyzed against the WWC's criteria to assess the rigor of each studies' methodology. Finally, studies were categorized across indicators that are clinically relevant to teaching menstrual care skills. RESULTS: The results highlighted a lack of empirical support for teaching menstrual care skills. 7 single-subject design studies were identified in the previous 40 years of research. One study met all criteria required to receive the WWC's highest rating. CONCLUSION: The complexity and private nature of menstrual care skills can make intervention development daunting. This paper was intended to provide menstrual care researchers with guidance in implementing high-quality studies. Additionally, scientist-practitioners can find guidance regarding important considerations to support programming that is both effective and respectful.
Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 2025 · doi:10.1080/09638280150211202