ArticleBMJ open2019
'
Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploring Values Conflict Between Islamic Modesty and Healthcare Guidelines Among Healthcare Providers and Students: A Scoping Review.Journal of transcultural nursing : official journal of the Transcultural Nursing Society · 2026Article
- Workplace discrimination among Muslim nurses in the United States: a qualitative content analysis.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- Understanding the Experiences of LGBTQ+ Identifying Medical Students in the UK: A Multi-Institutional Qualitative Study.Medical science educator · 2026Article
- 'Never Going to be a Cut Above [the Rest].' Medical Students' Perceptions of How Their Personal Protected Characteristics Impacted Surgical Learning.Medical science educator · 2025Article
- Supporting Muslim undergraduate medical students through medical school: lessons from a novel, student-led case-based learning intervention.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- The conditional inclusion of Muslims in medicine: intersectional experiences of Muslim medical students at the University of Toronto's Faculty of Medicine from 1887-1964.Canadian medical education journal · 2024Article
- The weaponization of professionalism against physicians of color.Human resources for health · 2024Article
- Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementias in Muslim Women: Recommendations for Culturally Sensitive Care.Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD · 2024Review
- Intersectionality: Understanding the Interdependent Systems of Discrimination and Disadvantage.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2023Review
- Dismantling gendered Islamophobia in medicine.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2022Article
- Rigid infection prevention and control rules and religious discrimination: An uncomfortable juxtaposition?Journal of infection prevention · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe objective of this study is to explore the impact of workplace dress code policies and guidance that may influence inclusivity and opportunities in the workplace.
designQuantitative, self-completion cross-sectional survey.
settingBritish Islamic Medical Association conference.
participantsEighty-four female medical healthcare professionals with a range of ethnicities and wide geographical coverage. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The study reports on the experiences of female Muslim healthcare professions wearing the headscarf in theatre and their views of the bare below the elbows (BBE) policy. Percentage of positive answers and their respective 95% CIs are calculated.
resultsThe majority of participants agreed that wearing the headscarf was important for themselves and their religious beliefs (94.1%), yet over half (51.5%) experienced problems trying to wear a headscarf in theatre; some women felt embarrassed (23.4%), anxious (37.1%) and bullied (36.5%). A variety of different methods in head covering in operating theatres were identified. The majority of respondents (56.3%) felt their religious requirement to cover their arms was not respected by their trust, with nearly three-quarters (74.1%) of respondents not happy with their trust's BBE uniform policy alternative. Dissatisfaction with the current practice of headscarves in theatre and BBE policy was highlighted, with some respondents preferring to specialise as GPs rather than in hospital medicine because of dress code matters. The hijab prototype proposed by the research team also received a positive response (98.7%).
conclusionsOur study suggests that female Muslims working in the National Health Service (NHS) reported experiencing challenges when wearing the headscarf in theatre and with BBE policy. The NHS needs to make its position clear to avoid variations in individual trust interpretation of dress code policies. This illustrates a wider issue of how policies can be at odds with personal beliefs which may contribute to a reduction in workforce diversity.
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.