Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34731177›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Measurement of gender as a social determinant of health in epidemiology-A scoping review.

Céline Miani, Lisa Wandschneider, Jana Niemann, Stephanie Batram-Zantvoort, Oliver Razum

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing 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

50 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. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Frontiers in global women's health · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  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.

Céline MianiDepartment of Epidemiology and International Public Health, School of Public Health, Bielefeld University, Bielefeld, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-3835-0287
Lisa WandschneiderDepartment of Epidemiology and International Public Health, School of Public Health, Bielefeld University, Bielefeld, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-7527-0353
Jana NiemannInstitute of Medical Sociology, Martin-Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle, Germany.
Stephanie Batram-ZantvoortDepartment of Epidemiology and International Public Health, School of Public Health, Bielefeld University, Bielefeld, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-3948-9777
Oliver RazumDepartment of Epidemiology and International Public Health, School of Public Health, Bielefeld University, Bielefeld, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe relevance of gender as a social determinant of health and its role in the production of health inequalities is now broadly acknowledged. However, the plethora of existing approaches to capture gender, which often stem from disciplines outside of epidemiology, makes it difficult to assess their practicality and relevance for a given research purpose. We conducted a scoping review to 1) map the evidence of how gender can be operationalised in quantitative epidemiology and 2) design a tool to critically evaluate the measures identified.

methodsWe identified peer-reviewed articles in electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and PsycINFO). Eligible sources described the quantitative operationalisation of the social dimension of gender. With the help of a newly developed checklist, we assessed their relevance from an analytical perspective (e.g. intersectionality) and their potential for implementation in epidemiology.

resultsGender measures principally assessed gender roles and norms, gender-based discrimination and violence, and structural gender (in)equality. Of the 344 measures included in this review, the majority lacked theoretical foundation, and tended to reinforce the binary understanding of gender through stereotypes of femininity and masculinity. Only few measures allowed for an intersectional approach and a multilevel understanding of gender mechanisms. From a practical point of view, gender measures demonstrated potential for use in varied populations and contexts.

conclusionsA range of gender measures are readily available for epidemiological research, addressing different levels and dimensions of gender as a social construct. With our theory-informed, practice-driven scoping review, we highlighted strengths and limitations of such measures and provided analytical tools for researchers interested in conducting intersectional, gender-sensitive analyses.

Indexed as

Epidemiologic StudiesSocial Determinants of HealthFemaleHealth Status DisparitiesHumansIntersectional FrameworkMaleSex Characteristics

Identifiers

PMID34731177
PMCPMC8565751

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.