Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27055029›Full record

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.

Anne Hammarström, Maria Wiklund, Britt-Marie Stålnacke, Arja Lehti, Inger Haukenes, Anncristine Fjellman-Wiklund

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Anne HammarströmDepartment of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Unit of Social Medicine, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Maria WiklundDepartment of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Unit of Social Medicine, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Britt-Marie StålnackeDepartment of Community Medicine and Rehabilitation, Rehabilitation Medicine, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Arja LehtiDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Unit of Professional Development, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Inger HaukenesDepartment of Public Mental Health, Division of Mental Health, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Kalfarveien 31, Bergen, Norway.
Anncristine Fjellman-WiklundDepartment of Community Medicine and Rehabilitation, Physiotherapy, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Umeå University · SENorwegian Institute of Public Health · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

AwarenessModels, BiologicalSurveys and QuestionnairesFemaleHumansMalePainPain ManagementSex FactorsSocioeconomic Factors

Identifiers

PMID27055029
PMCPMC4824419
OpenAlexW2321865889

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.