ArticlePLOS global public health2022
A gendered content analysis of the World Health Organization's COVID-19 guidance and policies.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Toward a common lexicon in gender analysis for global health programs and policies.Health policy and planning · 2026Article
- Assessing the gender responsiveness of tuberculosis interventions: a scoping review (2000-2025).Systematic reviews · 2026Article
- SDG5 "Gender Equality" and the COVID-19 pandemic: A rapid assessment of health system responses in selected upper-middle and high-income countries.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As with previous global public health emergencies, the COVID-19 pandemic has had distinct and disproportionate impacts on women and their health and livelihoods. As the leader in global public health, it is incumbent upon the World Health Organization (WHO) to ensure gender is prioritized in pandemic response. We conducted a policy analysis of 338 WHO COVID-19 documents and found that only 20% explicitly discuss gender and over half do not mention women, gender, or sex at all. Considering the well documented gendered effects of pandemics and the WHO's commitment to gender mainstreaming, this paper: 1) asks to what degree and how the WHO incorporates a gender inclusive approach; 2) maps where and how gender considerations are included; and 3) analyses what this suggests about WHO's commitment to gender mainstreaming within its COVID-19 response and beyond. We demonstrate that WHO should increase its gender mainstreaming efforts and incorporate gender considerations related to health emergencies more often and in more policy areas.
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.