Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38495418›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in psychology2024

MANdatory - why men need (and are needed for) gender equality progress.

Colette Van Laar, Aster Van Rossum, Natasza Kosakowska-Berezecka, Renata Bongiorno, Katharina Block

Erratum issuedAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. COVID-19 in Rural Ontario Communities: Exploring Women's Mental Health During a Pandemic.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Article
  7. Lost opportunities: How gendered arrangements harm men.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Colette Van LaarDepartment of Psychology, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Aster Van RossumDepartment of Psychology, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Natasza Kosakowska-BerezeckaInstitute of Psychology, University of Gdansk, Gdansk, Pomeranian Voivodeship, Poland.
Renata BongiornoSchool of Social Sciences, Bath Spa University, Bath, United Kingdom.
Katharina BlockDepartment of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While much progress has been made towards gender equality, diversity and inclusion in the workplace, education and society, recent years have also revealed continuing challenges that slow or halt this progress. To date, the majority of gender equality action has tended to approach gender equality from one side: being focused on the need to remove barriers for girls and women. We argue that this is only half the battle, and that a focus on men is MANdatory, highlighting three key areas: First, we review men's privileged status as being potentially threatened by progress in gender equality, and the effects of these threats for how men engage in gender-equality progress. Second, we highlight how men themselves are victims of restrictive gender roles, and the consequences of this for men's physical and mental health, and for their engagement at work and at home. Third, we review the role of men as allies in the fight for gender equality, and on the factors that impede and may aid in increasing men's involvement. We end with recommendations for work organizations, educational institutions and society at large to reach and involve men as positive agents of social change.

Indexed as

gendergender rolesmen and masculinityprecarious manhoodsocial changesocial equality

Identifiers

PMID38495418
PMCPMC10940445

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.