Trial reportPloS one2016
Developing a Tool for Increasing the Awareness about Gendered and Intersectional Processes in the Clinical Assessment of Patients--A Study of Pain Rehabilitation.
Trial report in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intersectional Bias in Healthcare-The Inequity Borne by the Patients: A Qualitative Study.Journal of oral rehabilitation · 2026Article
- A deeper consideration of sex/gender in quantitative health research: a checklist for incorporating multidimensionality, variety, embodiment, and intersectionality throughout the whole research process.BMC medical research methodology · 2024Article
- A Web-Based Gender-Sensitive Educational Simulation on Vocational Rehabilitation for Service Providers Working With Youth With Disabilities: Pilot Evaluation.JMIR formative research · 2023Article
- Consideration of sex/gender in publications of quantitative health-related research: Development and application of an assessment matrix.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- What social determinants outside paid work are related to development of mental health during life? An integrative review of results from the Northern Swedish Cohort.BMC public health · 2021Review
- Gender Medicine and Physiotherapy: A Need for Education. Findings from an Italian National Survey.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Sex and gender matters : A sex-specific analysis of original articles published in the Wiener klinische Wochenschrift between 2013 and 2015.Wiener klinische Wochenschrift · 2017Article
- Access to rehabilitation: patient perceptions of inequalities in access to specialty pain rehabilitation from a gender and intersectional perspective.Global health actionArticle
- Physiotherapeutic interventions and physical activity for children in Northern Sweden with cerebral palsy: a register study from equity and gender perspectives.Global health actionArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThere is a need for tools addressing gender inequality in the everyday clinical work in health care. The aim of our paper was to develop a tool for increasing the awareness of gendered and intersectional processes in clinical assessment of patients, based on a study of pain rehabilitation.
methodsIn the overarching project named "Equal care in rehabilitation" we used multiple methods (both quantitative and qualitative) in five sub studies. With a novel approach we used Grounded Theory in order to synthesize the results from our sub studies, in order to develop the gender equality tool. The gender equality tool described and developed in this article is thus based on results from sub studies about the processes of assessment and selection of patients in pain rehabilitation. Inspired by some questions in earlier tools, we posed open ended questions and inductively searched for findings and concepts relating to gendered and social selection processes in pain rehabilitation, in each of our sub studies. Through this process, the actual gender equality tool was developed as 15 questions about the process of assessing and selecting patients to pain rehabilitation. As a more comprehensive way of understanding the tool, we performed a final step of the GT analyses. Here we synthesized the results of the tool into a comprehensive model with two dimensions in relation to several possible discrimination axes.
resultsThe process of assessing and selecting patients was visualized as a funnel, a top down process governed by gendered attitudes, rules and structures. We found that the clinicians judged inner and outer characteristics and status of patients in a gendered and intersectional way in the process of clinical decision-making which thus can be regarded as (potentially) biased with regard to gender, socio-economic status, ethnicity and age. IMPLICATIONS: The clinical implications of our tool are that the tool can be included in the systematic routine of clinical assessment of patients for both awareness raising and as a base for avoiding gender bias in clinical decision-making. The tool could also be used in team education for health professionals as an instrument for critical reflection on gender bias.
conclusionsThus, tools for clinical assessment can be developed from empirical studies in various clinical settings. However, such a micro-level approach must be understood from a broader societal perspective including gender relations on both the macro- and the meso-level.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.