Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32972629›Full record

ReviewMaturitas2020

The impact of socioeconomic position (SEP) on women's health over the lifetime.

Adrienne O'Neil, Josephine D Russell, Kelly Thompson, Melissa L Martinson, Sanne A E Peters

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Maturitas, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 5 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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Gender and sex differences in colorectal cancer screening, diagnosis and treatment.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2025
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

5 authors.

Adrienne O'NeilHeart & Mind Research, iMPACT Institute, Deakin University, 3220, VIC, Australia. Electronic address: adrienne.oneil@deakin.edu.au.
Josephine D RussellHeart & Mind Research, iMPACT Institute, Deakin University, 3220, VIC, Australia.
Kelly ThompsonGlobal Women's Health, The George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, Australia.
Melissa L MartinsonSchool of Social Work, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.
Sanne A E PetersThe George Institute for Global Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK; Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands; The George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.

Funding

Scientific/Technical CoreP2CHD042828 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI SARA R. CURRAN · 2017 to 2026
$6.3M
Medical Research Council MR/P014550/1NICHD NIH HHS P2C HD042828
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The "social gradient of health" refers to the steep inverse associations between socioeconomic position (SEP) and the risk of premature mortality and morbidity. In many societies, due to cultural and structural factors, women and girls have reduced access to the socioeconomic resources that ensure good health and wellbeing when compared with their male counterparts. Thus, the objective of this paper is to review how SEP - a construct at the heart of the Social Determinants of Health (SDoH) theory - shapes the health and longevity of women and girls at all stages of the lifespan. Using literature identified from PubMed, Cochrane, CINAHL and EMBASE databases, we first describe the SDoH theory. We then use examples from each stage of the life course to demonstrate how SEP can differentially shape girls' and women's health outcomes compared with boys' and men's, as well as between sub-groups of girls and women when other axes of inequalities are considered, including ethnicity, race and residential setting. We also explore the key consideration of whether conventional SEP markers are appropriate for understanding the social determinants of women's health. We conclude by making key recommendations in the context of clinical, research and policy development.

Indexed as

Women's HealthFemaleHumansSocioeconomic FactorsGirlsSocial gradientSocioeconomic positionWomen’s health

Identifiers

PMID32972629
PMCPMC7273147

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.