ArticlePloS one2024
Exploring the inequalities experienced by health and care workforce and their bases - A scoping review protocol.
Article in PloS one, 2024. 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.
- Rethinking mental healthcare: operationalising intersectionality through a community-driven social clinic model.Journal of global health · 2025Article
- Mind the 'inequality' gap: intersectionality-informed scoping review of inequalities and adverse experiences of health and care workers globally.BMJ global health · 2025Article
- Where are my Black professors? The research culture preventing Black researchers from thriving in UK institutions.Wellcome open research · 2025Review
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
Planning for investment in human resources for health (HRH) is critical to achieve Universal Health Coverage (UHC) and establish a sustainable health system. Informed planning warrants a better understanding of the health labour market (HLM) to tackle a variety of health and care workforce challenges: from addressing critical supply shortage, to ensuring optimal skills mix and distribution, and addressing motivation and performance challenges. Scant evidence around the overall role of socioeconomic and cultural factors like gender, race, marital status, citizenship (migrant) status, workplace hierarchy etc. in determining workforce composition, deployment, distribution, retention, un- and underemployment, sub-optimal work environments and other factors in the 'HRH crisis' warrants further exploration. This scoping review protocol aims to map and present the available evidence on inequalities experienced by health and care workforce, the socio-economic, cultural and other bases of these inequalities, and their outcomes/ consequences. PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL and SCOPUS will be used to identify relevant literature. All types of published study designs in English language will be included if they discuss any inequality experienced by any category of health and care workers. Elaborate keyword categories for health and care workers and inequalities context have been developed, tested and reduced to the near-final search string. Eligible articles will be charted using the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist. The sample data extraction chart in JBI manual will be used as a basic skeleton with fields added to it to serve the needs of the scoping review. Descriptive analysis will be performed, depicting basic frequencies. While no further analysis has been advised in the JBI and PRISMA protocol, thematic analysis will be undertaken; following the Braun and Clarke's method with some modification and open coding as suggested by Maquire and Delahunt.
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.