SynthesisBMC medicine2024
Medical student perceptions of gender and pain: a systematic review of the literature.
Synthesis in BMC medicine, 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.
- Gender, Gender Role Beliefs, and Evaluation of Pain in Others: Indirect and Moderated Pathways.European journal of pain (London, England) · 2026Article
- When the diagnosis misses the mark: The psychiatric cost of misdiagnosing hypophosphatasia as fibromyalgia.World journal of clinical cases · 2025Article
- The economics of investing in women and health.Nature medicine · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGender bias exists in healthcare and affects how pain is assessed and managed. This bias affects patient outcomes and their trust in healthcare professionals. We also know that future clinicians develop their attitudes early in training. Medical school is therefore an opportunity to shape the values of future doctors and to combat systemic gender bias in healthcare. This systematic review aims to explore medical student perceptions of the relationship between patients' gender and their pain, so that recommendations can be made for developing medical education.
methodsEmbase, MEDLINE, PsychINFO, LILACS, Global Index Medicus, PakMediNet and ERIC were searched for articles relating to medical student perceptions of gender and pain, with no geographical or language limitations. Quality was assessed using the Medical Education Research Study Quality Index and the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist.
resultsNine publications were identified, two qualitative and seven quantitative. All studies had methodological limitations. Many different study designs were used, although most involved simulated patients. All studies referred to gender as binary. Multiple studies found that women's pain is more likely to be underestimated by medical students and that the patient's gender drives different approaches during clinical history taking, examination and management in these simulated situations. Only one study found no effect of patients' gender on students' perception of their pain.
conclusionsWhilst there is a paucity of high-quality studies in this area, patients' gender was found to affect how their pain is perceived by medical students. No studies explored where students' attitudes towards gender and pain arise from, and few involved 'real life situations'. We propose that further work into medical student perceptions in 'real situations' is needed. This will help to inform how undergraduate medical education can be developed to tackle gender bias, and ultimately improve outcomes for patients.
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.