Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32215245›Full record

ReviewZeitschrift fur Gesundheitswissenschaften = Journal of public health2017

Gender influence on health and risk behavior in primary prevention: a systematic review.

Julia Hiller, Kathrina Schatz, Hans Drexler

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Zeitschrift fur Gesundheitswissenschaften = Journal of public health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 94 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
94citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

94 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trends in orthodontic treatment prevalence in Switzerland : A two-decade perspective.Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

34 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors.

Julia HillerInstitute and Out-Patient Clinic for Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine of the Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Schillerstraße 25/29, 91054 Erlangen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-4314-8756
Kathrina SchatzInstitute and Out-Patient Clinic for Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine of the Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Schillerstraße 25/29, 91054 Erlangen, Germany.
Hans DrexlerInstitute and Out-Patient Clinic for Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine of the Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Schillerstraße 25/29, 91054 Erlangen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimPrevention plays a crucial part in healthcare systems and is greatly influenced by the health and risk behavior of the population. The extent to which special tailoring to the addressed subjects would be helpful in improving the effectiveness of prevention measures is unknown. Therefore, the goal of this systematic review is to assess gender-specific differences in primary prevention actions. SUBJECT AND

methodsA systematic review was conducted in 2015 by searching the PubMed (Medline) and Cochrane Library databases as well as adding additional studies by cross-referencing. The search focused on studies with an analysis of gender differences in health and risk behavior concerning primary prevention. Therefore, major exclusion criteria were single-gender studies, underage (<18 years) study collectives and secondary or tertiary prevention measures.

resultsIn total, 23 studies from 13 different countries were included in the qualitative evaluation. The studies covered 11 different subtopics of primary prevention, but were too diverse in content and type to draw many fundamental conclusions. A meta-analysis was not possible. Generally a tendency for females to be more health-conscious and engaged in preventive behavior could be seen in most subgroups.

conclusionThe importance of gender-specific prevention measures for the healthcare system is being increasingly stressed, but only a few studies specifically analyzing the influence of gender on preventive behavior could be identified. To implement appropriate primary prevention measures tailored to gender-specific needs, more details and studies on gender differences are needed.

Indexed as

GenderHealth behaviorPrimary preventionRisk behavior

Identifiers

PMID32215245
PMCPMC7088168

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.