ArticleJournal of family medicine and primary care2022
A community-based, cross-sectional study of gender egalitarianism: A promising scenario from an urban field practice area attached to a teaching institute from Central India.
Article in Journal of family medicine and primary care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Context: Gender-based discrimination is more predominant in India. In spite of various laws, gender inequality is an evil that plagues society even today. This is an important challenge for meeting our Sustainable Development Goals. Methods: This cross-sectional study was carried out in an urban field practice area. Study subjects were married women and their husbands in the age-group of 15-49 years along with their under-five children. Gender egalitarianism was assessed for factors like education, employment and media exposure. Factors which were studied for revealing gender egalitarianism among children included sex ratio, immunization status, nutritional status and health care expenditure. Completed family size and preference for the sex of the child were enquired about to assess the inclination towards male gender of the baby. Anthro software was used for statistical analysis. Results: Gender egalitarianism was found with regards to education. However, significant difference was noted in the employment status of men and women. Overall, sex ratio was in favor of girls. Though gender inequality was evident from the results, it was more in favor of girls. There was no evidence of gender bias for immunization of children. It was observed that more boys were stunted than girls and almost equal proportion of boys and girls were wasted. Conclusions: Factors like high literacy, control over income, access to financial resources made women more empowered and such empowered women were less likely to show son preference. Hence, there was no gender inequality among children in the present study.
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.