ArticleFrontiers in public health2024
Lack of sex- and gender-disaggregated data in diagnostics: findings from a scoping review of five tracer conditions.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Sex and gender can affect all aspects of health-related behavior, yet there is limited information on how they influence diagnosis of any health condition. This scoping review examined the extent to which sex- and gender-disaggregated data on diagnostics are available for five tracer conditions: tuberculosis, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), diabetes, malaria, and schistosomiasis. Methods: Publications were searched between 2000 and 2022 on PubMed and Google Scholar and screened for relevance. Extracted data were analysed using descriptive quantitative and qualitative approaches. Results: We identified 29 relevant articles for tuberculosis, four for diabetes, six for schistosomiasis, eight for COVID-19, and three for malaria. For tuberculosis, most studies looked at gender-based barriers to diagnosis and disparities in health-seeking behaviors that predominantly affected women. For diabetes, studies noted that women had lower odds of being screened for prediabetes and potentially lower quality of care versus men. For schistosomiasis, studies suggested lower sensitivity diagnostic methods among women than men and low awareness of the disease. Studies suggest that women are less likely to be diagnosed for COVID-19 in certain settings. Studies on malaria reported that women show different health-seeking behaviors to men. Conclusion: This scoping review highlights a concerning lack of sex- and gender-disaggregated data on diagnostics. Consequently, further work is required to develop and implement an appropriate framework to assess gender and sex-related data around testing and diagnosis.
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.