Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38635776›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Gender health gaps in guideline-based inpatient cardiovascular medical and nursing care and implementation strategies to reduce the gap (HeartGap): A mixed methods study protocol.

Sophia Sgraja, Judith Mollenhauer, Martina Kloepfer, Ute Seeland, Clarissa Kurscheid, Volker Amelung

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

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 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Sophia SgrajaInstitute for Epidemiology, Social Medicine and Health Systems Research, Hannover Medical School, Hanover, Germany.ORCID 0009-0006-9104-7585
Judith Mollenhauerfigus-Research Institute for Health- and System Design, Cologne, Germany.
Martina KloepferInstitute for Gender Health, Berlin, Germany.
Ute SeelandInstitute for Social Medicine, Epidemiology and Health Economics, Charité, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-1979-386X
Clarissa Kurscheidfigus-Research Institute for Health- and System Design, Cologne, Germany.
Volker AmelungInstitute for Epidemiology, Social Medicine and Health Systems Research, Hannover Medical School, Hanover, Germany.
Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care · DEMedizinische Hochschule Hannover · DEBerlin Institute of Health at Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DECharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA growing body of evidence has demonstrated that a gender-sensitive approach to healthcare is needed in all areas of medicine. Although medical and nursing guidelines include gender-sensitive care (GSC+) recommendations, the level of implementation in health care practice is unknown. This study aims to examine the current level of implementation and acceptance of GSC+ among physicians and nurses and to identify potential gaps between guidelines and practice and barriers and facilitators of GSC+ implementation, taking the perceptions of all relevant stakeholders into account. The overarching aim is to develop holistic recommended actions to strengthen GSC+.

methodsThis study has a mixed methods triangulation design. The preparation phase consisting of a literature review and a two-part (qualitative and quantitative) data analysis will be conducted in the cardiology department of 9 pilot hospitals in Berlin, North Rhine-Westphalia, Lower Saxony, Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany. 18 focus groups with clinicians and nurses as well as interviews with experts in other relevant fields will be performed. In the national roll-out phase, a questionnaire survey will be conducted with hospital clinicians (n = 382), nurses (n = 386) and patients (n = 388). DISCUSSION: This study will provide comprehensive insights into the implementation and acceptance of GSC+ in cardiology from the perspective of doctors, nurses, patients, stakeholders and experts in relevant fields, such as policy and education. A focus will also be on the extent to which age or gender of health professionals, region and hospital type influence the implementation of GSC+. The identification of GSC+ implementation barriers and facilitators should help to improve the standard of care for cardiology patients of all genders. The outcomes from this study can be used to develop measures and recommended actions for the successful and sustainable implementation of gender-sensitive care.

trial registrationThe study is registered in the German Register of Clinical Studies (DRKS) under study number DRKS00031317.

Indexed as

InpatientsPhysiciansDelivery of Health CareFemaleFocus GroupsHealth PersonnelHumansMaleReview Literature as Topic

Identifiers

PMID38635776
PMCPMC11025927
OpenAlexW4394933588

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.