ReviewBMJ global health2025
Is 'gender equality in health' the right goal? Exploring issues of definition and measurement.
Review in BMJ global health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Global associations of adolescent health with inclusive and sustainable well-being, 2010-2035.Journal of global health · 2026Article
- Structural gender inequities in dental specialty training in Türkiye: evidence from a national cross-sectional study.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Advancing women's health through equity in quantitative sciences: promoting sex- and gender-based modeling in clinical trials and real-world studies.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Reducing bias and enhancing equity in AI-enabled precision nutrition: addressing measurement error across wearables, multiomics, and dietary data.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Review
- From sex differences to sex inequalities in life expectancy: A cross-country observational benchmarking analysis.PLoS medicine · 2025Observational
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
Achieving 'gender equality in health' has been advocated by many as a key goal in health globally; however, we observe this goal has been defined differently by different users. In this paper, we explore the question of how progress towards gender equality in health has been defined and measured, and how the selection of indicators and targets can influence perceptions of who in a population is suffering disadvantage. We summarise the common population health measures-such as life expectancy and risk exposure-and illustrate how each of these measures may lead to different conclusions about gender equality in health. We call for more specificity when defining and measuring gender inequality in health, and propose expanding the focus from 'gender inequalities' (comparison between genders) to also addressing 'within-gender inequities' (a focus that incorporates addressing inequities within different gender identity groups).
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.