Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33895719›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2021

Gender inequality and the double burden of disease in low-income and middle-income countries: an ecological study.

Mirte van der Ham, Renee Bolijn, Alcira de Vries, Maiza Campos Ponce, Irene G M van Valkengoed

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors.

Mirte van der HamDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Renee BolijnDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, The Netherlands r.bolijn@amsterdamumc.nl.ORCID 0000-0002-0803-6118
Alcira de VriesDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Maiza Campos PonceDepartment of Health Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1091, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Irene G M van ValkengoedDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionMany low-income and middle-income countries (LMIC) suffer from a double burden of infectious diseases (ID) and non-communicable diseases (NCD). Previous research suggests that a high rate of gender inequality is associated with a higher ID and NCD burden in LMIC, but it is unknown whether gender inequality is also associated with a double burden of disease. In this ecological study, we explored the association between gender inequality and the double burden of disease in LMIC.

methodsFor 108 LMIC, we retrieved the Gender Inequality Index (GII, scale 0-1) and calculated the double burden of disease, based on disability-adjusted life-years for a selection of relevant ID and NCD, using WHO data. We performed logistic regression analysis to study the association between gender inequality and the double burden of disease for the total population, and stratified for men and women. We adjusted for income, political stability, type of labour, urbanisation, government health expenditure, health infrastructure and unemployment. Additionally, we conducted linear regression models for the ID and NCD separately.

resultsThe GII ranged from 0.13 to 0.83. A total of 37 LMIC had a double burden of disease. Overall, the adjusted OR for double burden of disease was 1.05 per 0.01 increase of GII (95% CI 0.99 to 1.10, p=0.10). For women, there was a borderline significant positive association between gender inequality and double burden of disease (OR 1.05, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.11, p=0.06), while there was no association in men (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.04, p=0.75).

conclusionWe found patterns directing towards a positive association between gender inequality and double burden of disease, overall and in women. This finding suggests the need for more attention for structural factors underlying gender inequality to potentially reduce the double burden of disease.

Indexed as

Developing CountriesNoncommunicable DiseasesCost of IllnessFemaleHumansIncomeMalePovertySocioeconomic Factorsepidemiologypublic healthsocial medicine

Identifiers

PMID33895719
PMCPMC8074552

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.