A University of Nottingham data analytics and AI expert has jointly led a major new study revealing that more than a quarter of people purchasing menstrual products also buy pain relief at the same time, highlighting the widespread impact of menstrual pain and significant inequalities linked to income levels across England.
Published in the open-access journal PLOS Digital Health, the study analysed more than 211 million supermarket transactions to explore patterns in menstrual pain management using supermarket loyalty card data.
This first-of-its-kind research represents a partnership between the University of Bristol, where Dr Victoria Sivill and her supervisor, Dr Anya Skatova, worked in collaboration with Professor James Goulding, Chair of Data Science and Director of Nottingham University Business School's N/Lab Research Centre.
The researchers say the findings demonstrate the need for greater awareness of menstrual pain and targeted public health interventions to address inequalities in access to pain relief and menstrual healthcare.
It is wonderful that smart data research in the UK is able to bring issues which may once have been overlooked in scientific settings - such as the sheer scale and impact of menstrual pain - to light. This is well overdue.
Menstrual pain affects millions of people globally and can have a substantial impact on everyday life, including education, work and wellbeing. However, there has been limited large-scale data available to understand how people manage symptoms and how experiences differ across communities.
The research team analysed anonymised loyalty card data from a major UK health and beauty retailer, covering over 3.4 million customers and 211 million historical transactions between 2006 and 2015. The study examined how frequently menstrual products and pain relief were purchased together in comparison with customers' usual pain purchasing behaviour, to understand the extent and scale of menstrual pain.
The findings showed that 26.7 per cent of customers purchasing menstrual products also bought pain relief in the same transaction. Customers were almost four times more likely to purchase pain relief when buying menstrual products than during other shopping trips.
The study also found strong socio-economic differences. Customers at stores in the lowest-income areas were 32 per cent less likely to purchase pain relief alongside menstrual products compared with those in the highest-income areas. Researchers suggest this disparity is likely linked to affordability and access to over-the-counter medication, rather than differences in the prevalence of menstrual pain itself, pointing to a potentially unmet need.
As an additional validation of the methodology, researchers found that the most common interval between menstrual product purchases was exactly 28 days, closely matching the average menstrual cycle.
Like many women, I was aware of how common menstrual pain is, but the scale of painkiller purchases alongside menstrual products was still striking. Using shopping data, we can see just how widespread the need for pain relief really is. This kind of evidence helps make menstrual pain visible at a population level and provides a strong foundation for systemic change in how it is recognised, treated, and prioritised in public health.
