ArticleBMJ public health2025
What all physicians should know about women's health: a Delphi study.
Article in BMJ public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Preliminary development of a Risk Factor Index to identify older adults at risk of adverse medication-related outcomes: A Delphi Study.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Over the past few decades, knowledge of women's health regarding sex and gender differences in health has increased but transfer of these new insights into medical education and clinical practice is lagging, resulting in substandard care for women compared with men. This study aimed to reach consensus on what all physicians taking care of women should know about women's health. Methods: A Delphi study was executed involving statements prepared by experts in women's health across 10 medical specialties and a patient advisory board. Participants were recruited from Europe and Northern America through the experts' networks and snowball sampling. Participants voted IN/OUT on each statement based on its perceived relevance and feasibility for general physician knowledge, regardless of specialty. The statements were ranked according to a >80% consensus in the first Delphi round and a 4-point Likert scale in the second Delphi round. Results: In the first round, 44 participants fully completed the survey. 18 statements progressed to the second round, in which four additional statements were included based on participant suggestions. In the final round, 35 responses on the 22 selected statements resulted in consensus on 18 statements of the highest importance, within the following domains: the societal position of women in health, patient perception of disease and treatment, differences in symptomatology, pharmacological considerations and the impact of the female life cycle on health and disease. Conclusion: Consensus was reached on the top priority clinical conditions and public health issues in women's health, resulting in a list of 18 statements on women's health that every physician caring for women should know, regardless of specialty. There was also consensus on the importance of incorporating these insights into medical education. The next step involves implementing women's health education in medical schools, postgraduate education and continuing education for medical specialists.
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.