ArticleBMJ open2021
Response strategies for promoting gender equality in public health emergencies: a rapid scoping review.
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 10 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Disparities in Access to Deep Brain Stimulation for Parkinson's Disease and Proposed Interventions: A Literature Review.Stereotactic and functional neurosurgery · 2024Pooled it
- Association between public health emergencies and sexual and reproductive health, gender-based violence, and early marriage among adolescent girls: a rapid review.BMC public health · 2023Pooled it
- Global prevalence of domestic violence against adults during COVID-19 and its determinants: A systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression analysis.Women's health (London, England)Pooled it
- Prevention Science, Community Empowerment and Social Justice in Achieving Stronger, Healthier Communities.Journal of prevention (2022) · 2026Article
- [Impact of the national strategy against obesity and diabetes on the incidence of diabetes in Mexico, 2005-2023].Cadernos de saude publica · 2026Article
- Global and Regional Prevalence of Domestic Violence During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Its Determinants: Protocol for a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.JMIR research protocols · 2024Article
- A Mixed Methods Exploration of Young Women's Agency and Mental Health during COVID-19 in Low-Income Communities in Mumbai, India.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Article
- A Review of Intimate Partner Violence Interventions Relevant to Women During the COVID-19 Pandemic.Violence against women · 2024Review
- Intimate Partner Violence in the COVID-19 Era: A Health, Psychological, Forensic and Legal Perspective.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Response strategies for promoting gender equality in public health emergencies: a rapid scoping review.BMJ open · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe COVID-19 pandemic threatens to widen existing gender inequities worldwide. A growing body of literature assesses the harmful consequences of public health emergencies (PHEs) for women and girls; however, evidence of what works to alleviate such impacts is limited. To inform viable mitigation strategies, we reviewed the evidence on gender-based interventions implemented in PHEs, including disease outbreaks and natural disasters.
methodsWe conducted a rapid scoping review to identify eligible studies by systematically searching the databases MEDLINE, Global Health and Web of Science with the latest search update on 28 May 2021. We used the Sustainable Development Goals as a guiding framework to identify eligible outcomes of gender (in)equality.
resultsOut of 13 920 records, 16 studies met our eligibility criteria. These included experimental (3), cohort (2), case-control (3) and cross-sectional (9) studies conducted in the context of natural disasters (earthquakes, droughts and storms) or epidemics (Zika, Ebola and COVID-19). Six studies were implemented in Asia, seven in North/Central America and three in Africa. Interventions included economic empowerment programmes (5); health promotion, largely focused on reproductive health (10); and a postearthquake resettlement programme (1). Included studies assessed gender-based outcomes in the domains of sexual and reproductive health, equal opportunities, access to economic resources, violence and health. There was a dearth of evidence for other outcome domains relevant to gender equity such as harmful practices, sanitation and hygiene practices, workplace discrimination and unpaid work. Economic empowerment interventions showed promise in promoting women's and girls' economic and educational opportunities as well as their sexual and reproductive health during PHEs. However, some programme beneficiaries may be at risk of experiencing unintended harms such as an increase in domestic violence. Focused reproductive health promotion may also be an effective strategy for supporting women's sexual and reproductive health, although additional experimental evidence is needed.
conclusionsThis study identified critical evidence gaps to guide future research on approaches to alleviating gender inequities during PHEs. We further highlight that interventions to promote gender equity in PHEs should take into account possible harmful side effects such as increased gender-based violence. REVIEW REGISTRATION: DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/8HKFD.
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.