Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39926247›Full record

ArticlePatient preference and adherence2025

Gender Preferences in Healthcare: A Study of Saudi Patients' Physician Preferences.

Khalid M Alhomayani, Hashem A Bukhary, Fahd I Aljuaid, Turki A Alotaibi, Faisal S Alqurashi, Khaled N Althobaiti, Nawaf S Althobaiti, Osama Y Althomali, Abdullah A Althobaiti, Muhanad M Aljuaid and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

11 authors.

Khalid M AlhomayaniDepartment of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Taif University, Taif, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0009-0000-4698-4517
Hashem A BukharyDepartment of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Taif University, Taif, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0002-8333-1758
Fahd I AljuaidDepartment of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Taif University, Taif, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0009-0008-6461-5529
Turki A AlotaibiFaculty of Medicine, Taif University, Taif, Saudi Arabia.
Faisal S AlqurashiFaculty of Medicine, Taif University, Taif, Saudi Arabia.
Khaled N AlthobaitiFaculty of Medicine, Taif University, Taif, Saudi Arabia.
Nawaf S AlthobaitiFaculty of Medicine, Taif University, Taif, Saudi Arabia.
Osama Y AlthomaliFaculty of Medicine, Taif University, Taif, Saudi Arabia.
Abdullah A AlthobaitiFaculty of Medicine, Taif University, Taif, Saudi Arabia.
Muhanad M AljuaidFaculty of Medicine, Taif University, Taif, Saudi Arabia.
Abdullah M MuhyeiFaculty of Medicine, Taif University, Taif, Saudi Arabia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Objective: Cultural and social factors, including physician gender, shape patient-provider relationships in Saudi Arabia. Preferences extend beyond clinical competence to include characteristics like gender and perceived traits, potentially introducing biases. This study examines Saudi patients' gender preferences when selecting physicians. Method: A descriptive, cross-sectional study was conducted using a survey distributed via social media from February 11 to March 23, 2024. 1. The study was conducted across various regions of Saudi Arabia, with participants recruited via social media platforms using convenience sampling aged 18 years and older who were actively pursuing medical care. A total of 3949 participants (37.9% males and 62.1% females) with a mean age of 33.43 years and a standard deviation of 19.08 were included. The response rate was 99.1%. Data analysis, including descriptive statistics and subgroup comparisons, was performed using JMP version 14 Pro. Results: The sample showed a predominance of females (62.1%) and younger participants (18-25 years). Female participants preferred female doctors for general exams (67.9%), while males preferred male doctors (63.3%). Gender preferences were strongest for intimate examinations, with 90.8% of females and 72.3% of males favoring same-gender physicians. Similar patterns emerged in specialties like urology, where 71% of males preferred male physicians, while 64.4% of females preferred female physicians. Conclusion: Saudi patients exhibit gender preferences influenced by expertise, communication skills, and cultural norms. Gender significantly impacts comfort and satisfaction, especially in sensitive contexts like intimate exams and childbirth. These findings underscore the importance of gender-sensitive workforce planning to align physician assignments with patient preferences, enhancing satisfaction and trust. Future research should explore psychological and systemic factors driving these preferences to optimize patient-centered care and healthcare delivery systems.

Indexed as

gender preferenceshealthcare deliverymedical care preferencespatient’s satisfactionphysician–patient relationship

Identifiers

PMID39926247
PMCPMC11806673

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.