Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36527089›Full record

ArticleInternational journal for equity in health2022

Scoping 'sex' and 'gender' in rehabilitation: (mis)representations and effects.

Jessica Ott, Sarah N Champagne, Abdulgafoor M Bachani, Rosemary Morgan

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in International journal for equity in health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Effective Coverage of Rehabilitation for Adults with Chronic Primary Low Back Pain in Uganda.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jessica OttJohns Hopkins International Injury Research Unit, Health Systems Program, Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA. Jessica.Ott@jhu.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-1773-2190
Sarah N ChampagneJohns Hopkins International Injury Research Unit, Health Systems Program, Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7430-5366
Abdulgafoor M BachaniJohns Hopkins International Injury Research Unit, Health Systems Program, Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4455-9044
Rosemary MorganJohns Hopkins International Injury Research Unit, Health Systems Program, Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5009-8470
Johns Hopkins University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundResearchers have highlighted a large-scale global unmet need for rehabilitation. While sex and gender have been shown to interact with each other and with other social and structural factors to influence health and wellbeing, less is known about how sex and gender shape rehabilitation participation and outcomes within health systems.

methodsUsing an intersectional approach, we examine literature that explores the relationship between sex and/or gender and rehabilitation access, use, adherence, outcomes, and caregiving. Following a comprehensive search, 65 documents met the inclusion criteria for this scoping review of published literature. Articles were coded for rehabilitation-related themes and categorized by type of rehabilitation, setting, and age of participants, to explore how existing literature aligned with documented global rehabilitation needs. Responding to a common conflation of sex and gender in the existing literature and a frequent misrepresentation of sex and gender as binary, the researchers also developed a schema to determine whether existing literature accurately represented sex and gender.

resultsThe literature generally described worse rehabilitation access, use, adherence, and outcomes and a higher caregiving burden for conditions with rehabilitation needs among women than men. It also highlighted the interacting effects of social and structural factors like socioeconomic status, racial or ethnic identity, lack of referral, and inadequate insurance on rehabilitation participation and outcomes. However, existing literature on gender and rehabilitation has focused disproportionately on a few types of rehabilitation among adults in high-income country contexts and does not correspond with global geographic or condition-based rehabilitation needs. Furthermore, no articles were determined to have provided an apt depiction of sex and gender.

conclusionThis review highlights a gap in global knowledge about the relationship between sex and/or gender and rehabilitation participation and outcomes within health systems. Future research should rely on social science and intersectional approaches to elucidate how gender and other social norms, roles, and structures influence a gender disparity in rehabilitation participation and outcomes. Health systems should prioritize person-centered, gender-responsive care, which involves delivering services that are responsive to the complex social norms, roles, and structures that intersect to shape gender inequitable rehabilitation participation and outcomes in diverse contexts.

Indexed as

MedicineAdultFemaleHumansIncomeMaleResearch PersonnelAssistive technologyCaregivingGenderGlobal healthHealth systemsIntersectionalityRehabilitationSexSocial science

Identifiers

PMID36527089
PMCPMC9756604
OpenAlexW4312064785

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.